I don't understand why people keep saying the Patent system is broke. There would no point in inovating if you couldn't defend your technology. And shouldn't not being able to copy some ones work encourage new ideas
Because things get patented all the time that shouldn't be, under existing laws/rules!! That's a huge problem!
In other words, say someone wants to patent their product, but there's prior art... But it gets a patent anyway!!! That's against patent rules and it happens anyway! You don't see a problem with that? People patenting things they didn't invent and then suing other people once they get their ridiculous patent?
Gonna have to disagree about patents blocking innovation. Yeah, it sounds like sour grapes, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. If this is what it takes to help fix the absurdly broken patent system, then so be it.
Right. There are patents written to broadly cover a wide range of things that may be invented by someone in the future just so they can sue them when something is really invented. That sounds like blocking innovation to me. Similarly, patents are often used to double dip on licensing royalties since they normally don't seem to extend to a purchaser. So if you by a chipset for GSM signaling, the GSM patent holder can force both the chipset maker and whoever uses the chipset to buy a license from them. It also lets the license holder to collect different royalties depending on how much money you have.
It seems like the real problem people want to solve is the copy cat situation. That is more of a marketing issue. One company leeching off another companies marketing by producing a generic variant of their product and then feed of the creativity and marketing of the original product. It feels like the patent system is addressing the wrong problem.
Personally I think there should be a system in place for fair licensing of IP and maybe the prevention of copycat products for a certain amount of time.
Amen John. The ignorance shown here by those wishing to do away with the only effective process for protecting the innovation and creativity of the little guy is breath taking.
Bunch of open source hippy whine-bags. "Everything should be free!"
Right. There are patents written to broadly cover a wide range of things that may be invented by someone in the future just so they can sue them when something is really invented. That sounds like blocking innovation to me.
No, it sounds like a patent that shouldn't be issued. U.S. patent law requires that an invention be reduced to practice before a patent can be issued. The problem is the execution of the laws (where that requirement is sometimes ignored) rather than the laws themselves.
Patents encourage innovation - because they allow inventors to be rewarded for their efforts. Without patent protection, there would be no incentive to innovate.
This is nothing more than "sour grapes." I guarantee that Google would be singing a whole different tune right now if they had won the auction. They would be salivating over their shiny new toys. Also, it's complete BS that Google didn't care about Nortel's patents. Google cared enough to bid $4 billion for them.
I laugh my head off every time someone dismiss Apple as being long on marketing and short on substance. Google is no slouch in the marketing department. They're the ones who can make a stupid business decision seem like one done out of wanting to serve the common good. Last year, Google pulled out of China, which was not the best business decision. In typical Google fashion, the upper brass spun it as standing up for human rights. Others may interpret that as Google refusing to respect the host country's cultural standards. In any case, if the WikiLeak cables are true, it may have been smart to leave if the Chinese govt. was trying to hack Gmail accounts. The Nortel auction is another example. Google obviously cared about those patents. After losing, they're saying that patents "block innovation."
Don't get me wrong. Apple is no stranger to such marketing tactics. But everybody does them. Yet somehow, Apple always ends up with egg on its face. No one roots for Goliath.
Google can spout hot air all they want about respecting innovation and saying that patents "block innovation." They're not fooling me. We will see Google's true colors when someone threatens one of their core businesses. As successful as Android has been, it's not Google's core business segment. Search is everything. We shall see if Google walks the walk when someone threatens Google Search.
For one, it's going well for Google as Oracle's initial claims have been enormously reduced. They won't be getting nearly as much money as they wanted and the number of patents that they can even sue over has been chopped down to a fraction. If you're wondering about Sun, ask them. I don't think considered Larry Ellison when Google built Java.
Oh, bullshit! I can't do your homework for you but let me give you a few hints... Oracle, Apple, Paypal, 1plusV, Skyhook, FTC, EU, NHN Corp. and Daum Communications (S. Korea), copyright violations - re: book scanning...
Google's short history is filled with alleged antitrust, spying, stealing... can all of these people be wrong about Google?!
Give Google another 20 years and they'll make Apple look like kids in the church choir.
[on edit: regarding the "your company" comment... it had nothing to do with "you"... I was talking about the beliefs of Page and Brin... now reread what I wrote.]
A few things here...
1. I'm talking about using patents as an offense. I don't see Google running around suing a bunch of other guys over patents. Google has been big on patent reform for a long time now.
2. EVERYONE GETS SUED OVER PATENTS. Saying that they have been sued proves NOTHING. The whole point of this is that the patent system has become grotesquely convoluted and stupidly broad and obvious patents are used time and time again as a tool to extort money rather than protect the original inventor. Patents hardly have anything to do with invention anymore.
3. Copyright violation != patent violation. I'm talking specifically about Google's patent record, not other business practices. When you get that big, there's no such thing as a clean company. I'm comparing Google's track record on patent BS to Apple's, and I don't see how anyone can argue that Apple isn't abusing the patent system FAR more than Google is.
For one, it's going well for Google as Oracle's initial claims have been enormously reduced. They won't be getting nearly as much money as they wanted and the number of patents that they can even sue over has been chopped down to a fraction.
It's all about a possible injunction at the end of the day, and nothing has changed to make that impossible.
Quote:
If you're wondering about Sun, ask them. I don't think considered Larry Ellison when Google built Java.
You might want to revisit that last sentence, because no matter how I try, I can make no sense of it whatsoever.
As for the injunction, yes, that's what Oracle would go for to get a quick payout, much like Apple vs HTC. However, with the number of patents being reduced, their chances have been reduced as well. The case is moving forward at the usual sluggish pace. We'll see what happens, although I'm not so sure Oracle is going to succeed here.
Another of Google's legal guys posted an open letter today, expanding on earlier comments regarding patents and litigation. And yes, the letter seems a bit whiny. At the same time, there is a valid point or two hidden in there IMO, the biggest smoking gun being Apple and Microsoft working in concert to attack Android.
"I have worked in the tech sector for over two decades. Microsoft and Apple have always been at each other?s throats, so when they get into bed together you have to start wondering what?s going on. Here is what?s happening:
Android is on fire. More than 550,000 Android devices are activated every day, through a network of 39 manufacturers and 231 carriers. Android and other platforms are competing hard against each other, and that?s yielding cool new devices and amazing mobile apps for consumers.
But Android?s success has yielded something else: a hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple and other companies, waged through bogus patents.
They?re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell?s old patents (the ?CPTN? group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel?s old patents (the ?Rockstar? group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn?t get them; seeking $15 licensing fees for every Android device; attempting to make it more expensive for phone manufacturers to license Android (which we provide free of charge) than Windows Mobile; and even suing Barnes & Noble, HTC, Motorola, and Samsung. Patents were meant to encourage innovation, but lately they are being used as a weapon to stop it.
A smartphone might involve as many as 250,000 (largely questionable) patent claims, and our competitors want to impose a ?tax? for these dubious patents that makes Android devices more expensive for consumers. They want to make it harder for manufacturers to sell Android devices. Instead of competing by building new features or devices, they are fighting through litigation.
This anti-competitive strategy is also escalating the cost of patents way beyond what they?re really worth. Microsoft and Apple?s winning $4.5 billion for Nortel?s patent portfolio was nearly five times larger than the pre-auction estimate of $1 billion. Fortunately, the law frowns on the accumulation of dubious patents for anti-competitive means ? which means these deals are likely to draw regulatory scrutiny, and this patent bubble will pop.
We?re not naive; technology is a tough and ever-changing industry and we work very hard to stay focused on our own business and make better products. But in this instance we thought it was important to speak out and make it clear that we?re determined to preserve Android as a competitive choice for consumers, by stopping those who are trying to strangle it.
We?re looking intensely at a number of ways to do that. We?re encouraged that the Department of Justice forced the group I mentioned earlier to license the former Novell patents on fair terms, and that it?s looking into whether Microsoft and Apple acquired the Nortel patents for anti-competitive means. We?re also looking at other ways to reduce the anti-competitive threats against Android by strengthening our own patent portfolio. Unless we act, consumers could face rising costs for Android devices ? and fewer choices for their next phone.
Another of Google's legal guys posted an open letter today, expanding on earlier comments regarding patents and litigation. And yes, the letter seems a bit whiny. At the same time, there is a valid point or two hidden in there IMO, the biggest smoking gun being Apple and Microsoft working in concert to attack Android.
Microsoft tried to team up with Google recently on patent portfolios and Google turned them down. This whiny letter from Google is apparently a fiction being circulated for PR purposes, at least according to Microsoft executives who have posted copies of the email between Google and Microsoft:
Microsoft tried to team up with Google recently on patent portfolios and Google turned them down. This whiny letter from Google is apparently a fiction being circulated for PR purposes, at least according to Microsoft executives who have posted copies of the email between Google and Microsoft:
There's still confusion about what MS claims. It's all about the old NOVELL auction last year, not the Rockstar consortium (Apple/MS/RIM and others) that ganged up for the NORTEL patents. Google wasn't invited to the club for that one.
There's still confusion about what MS claims. It's all about the old NOVELL auction last year, not the Rockstar consortium (Apple/MS/RIM and others) that ganged up for the NORTEL patents. Google wasn't invited to the club for that one.
The point is that Microsoft has reached out to Google as a potential partner for these patent pools. That seems to fly in the face of Google's paranoid claims that everyone (including Microsoft) is out to get them.
Where I'm from, we would tell anyone acting that way to "put up or shut up". Companies aren't going pay billions of dollars to secure patent pools and then happily share them with Google who, despite being flush for cash, always seem to be tapped out when it's their turn to buy a round. They shouldn't be surprised when they find themselves uninvited to the party.
Then again, we're talking about a company who employ people that can't cook for themselves or do their own laundry. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised when they display behavior lacking in the social graces.
Comments
I don't understand why people keep saying the Patent system is broke. There would no point in inovating if you couldn't defend your technology. And shouldn't not being able to copy some ones work encourage new ideas
Because things get patented all the time that shouldn't be, under existing laws/rules!! That's a huge problem!
In other words, say someone wants to patent their product, but there's prior art... But it gets a patent anyway!!! That's against patent rules and it happens anyway! You don't see a problem with that? People patenting things they didn't invent and then suing other people once they get their ridiculous patent?
Gonna have to disagree about patents blocking innovation. Yeah, it sounds like sour grapes, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. If this is what it takes to help fix the absurdly broken patent system, then so be it.
Right. There are patents written to broadly cover a wide range of things that may be invented by someone in the future just so they can sue them when something is really invented. That sounds like blocking innovation to me. Similarly, patents are often used to double dip on licensing royalties since they normally don't seem to extend to a purchaser. So if you by a chipset for GSM signaling, the GSM patent holder can force both the chipset maker and whoever uses the chipset to buy a license from them. It also lets the license holder to collect different royalties depending on how much money you have.
It seems like the real problem people want to solve is the copy cat situation. That is more of a marketing issue. One company leeching off another companies marketing by producing a generic variant of their product and then feed of the creativity and marketing of the original product. It feels like the patent system is addressing the wrong problem.
Personally I think there should be a system in place for fair licensing of IP and maybe the prevention of copycat products for a certain amount of time.
Amen John. The ignorance shown here by those wishing to do away with the only effective process for protecting the innovation and creativity of the little guy is breath taking.
Bunch of open source hippy whine-bags. "Everything should be free!"
oh no, nu age hippies
China can copy anything, especially when they build it all for us. Without patent laws we would be done for.
Right. There are patents written to broadly cover a wide range of things that may be invented by someone in the future just so they can sue them when something is really invented. That sounds like blocking innovation to me.
No, it sounds like a patent that shouldn't be issued. U.S. patent law requires that an invention be reduced to practice before a patent can be issued. The problem is the execution of the laws (where that requirement is sometimes ignored) rather than the laws themselves.
Patents encourage innovation - because they allow inventors to be rewarded for their efforts. Without patent protection, there would be no incentive to innovate.
I laugh my head off every time someone dismiss Apple as being long on marketing and short on substance. Google is no slouch in the marketing department. They're the ones who can make a stupid business decision seem like one done out of wanting to serve the common good. Last year, Google pulled out of China, which was not the best business decision. In typical Google fashion, the upper brass spun it as standing up for human rights. Others may interpret that as Google refusing to respect the host country's cultural standards. In any case, if the WikiLeak cables are true, it may have been smart to leave if the Chinese govt. was trying to hack Gmail accounts. The Nortel auction is another example. Google obviously cared about those patents. After losing, they're saying that patents "block innovation."
Don't get me wrong. Apple is no stranger to such marketing tactics. But everybody does them. Yet somehow, Apple always ends up with egg on its face. No one roots for Goliath.
Google can spout hot air all they want about respecting innovation and saying that patents "block innovation." They're not fooling me. We will see Google's true colors when someone threatens one of their core businesses. As successful as Android has been, it's not Google's core business segment. Search is everything. We shall see if Google walks the walk when someone threatens Google Search.
If Sun was 'happy with google using the tech' why didn't they grant them a license? Easy enough to do.
Sorry but when your trial judge talks of your 'brazen attitude' your trial is not going well.
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...f-oracles.html
For one, it's going well for Google as Oracle's initial claims have been enormously reduced. They won't be getting nearly as much money as they wanted and the number of patents that they can even sue over has been chopped down to a fraction. If you're wondering about Sun, ask them. I don't think considered Larry Ellison when Google built Java.
Oh, bullshit! I can't do your homework for you but let me give you a few hints... Oracle, Apple, Paypal, 1plusV, Skyhook, FTC, EU, NHN Corp. and Daum Communications (S. Korea), copyright violations - re: book scanning...
Google's short history is filled with alleged antitrust, spying, stealing... can all of these people be wrong about Google?!
Give Google another 20 years and they'll make Apple look like kids in the church choir.
[on edit: regarding the "your company" comment... it had nothing to do with "you"... I was talking about the beliefs of Page and Brin... now reread what I wrote.]
A few things here...
1. I'm talking about using patents as an offense. I don't see Google running around suing a bunch of other guys over patents. Google has been big on patent reform for a long time now.
2. EVERYONE GETS SUED OVER PATENTS. Saying that they have been sued proves NOTHING. The whole point of this is that the patent system has become grotesquely convoluted and stupidly broad and obvious patents are used time and time again as a tool to extort money rather than protect the original inventor. Patents hardly have anything to do with invention anymore.
3. Copyright violation != patent violation. I'm talking specifically about Google's patent record, not other business practices. When you get that big, there's no such thing as a clean company. I'm comparing Google's track record on patent BS to Apple's, and I don't see how anyone can argue that Apple isn't abusing the patent system FAR more than Google is.
For one, it's going well for Google as Oracle's initial claims have been enormously reduced. They won't be getting nearly as much money as they wanted and the number of patents that they can even sue over has been chopped down to a fraction.
It's all about a possible injunction at the end of the day, and nothing has changed to make that impossible.
If you're wondering about Sun, ask them. I don't think considered Larry Ellison when Google built Java.
You might want to revisit that last sentence, because no matter how I try, I can make no sense of it whatsoever.
I don't think considered Larry Ellison when Google built Java.
Google built Java?
I wonder how Google would feel about "sharing" their patented search and indexing algorithms?
My thoughts exactly.
Google built Java?
Bleh, typo. I meant when Google built Android.
As for the injunction, yes, that's what Oracle would go for to get a quick payout, much like Apple vs HTC. However, with the number of patents being reduced, their chances have been reduced as well. The case is moving forward at the usual sluggish pace. We'll see what happens, although I'm not so sure Oracle is going to succeed here.
"I have worked in the tech sector for over two decades. Microsoft and Apple have always been at each other?s throats, so when they get into bed together you have to start wondering what?s going on. Here is what?s happening:
Android is on fire. More than 550,000 Android devices are activated every day, through a network of 39 manufacturers and 231 carriers. Android and other platforms are competing hard against each other, and that?s yielding cool new devices and amazing mobile apps for consumers.
But Android?s success has yielded something else: a hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple and other companies, waged through bogus patents.
They?re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell?s old patents (the ?CPTN? group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel?s old patents (the ?Rockstar? group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn?t get them; seeking $15 licensing fees for every Android device; attempting to make it more expensive for phone manufacturers to license Android (which we provide free of charge) than Windows Mobile; and even suing Barnes & Noble, HTC, Motorola, and Samsung. Patents were meant to encourage innovation, but lately they are being used as a weapon to stop it.
A smartphone might involve as many as 250,000 (largely questionable) patent claims, and our competitors want to impose a ?tax? for these dubious patents that makes Android devices more expensive for consumers. They want to make it harder for manufacturers to sell Android devices. Instead of competing by building new features or devices, they are fighting through litigation.
This anti-competitive strategy is also escalating the cost of patents way beyond what they?re really worth. Microsoft and Apple?s winning $4.5 billion for Nortel?s patent portfolio was nearly five times larger than the pre-auction estimate of $1 billion. Fortunately, the law frowns on the accumulation of dubious patents for anti-competitive means ? which means these deals are likely to draw regulatory scrutiny, and this patent bubble will pop.
We?re not naive; technology is a tough and ever-changing industry and we work very hard to stay focused on our own business and make better products. But in this instance we thought it was important to speak out and make it clear that we?re determined to preserve Android as a competitive choice for consumers, by stopping those who are trying to strangle it.
We?re looking intensely at a number of ways to do that. We?re encouraged that the Department of Justice forced the group I mentioned earlier to license the former Novell patents on fair terms, and that it?s looking into whether Microsoft and Apple acquired the Nortel patents for anti-competitive means. We?re also looking at other ways to reduce the anti-competitive threats against Android by strengthening our own patent portfolio. Unless we act, consumers could face rising costs for Android devices ? and fewer choices for their next phone.
Another of Google's legal guys posted an open letter today, expanding on earlier comments regarding patents and litigation. And yes, the letter seems a bit whiny. At the same time, there is a valid point or two hidden in there IMO, the biggest smoking gun being Apple and Microsoft working in concert to attack Android.
Microsoft tried to team up with Google recently on patent portfolios and Google turned them down. This whiny letter from Google is apparently a fiction being circulated for PR purposes, at least according to Microsoft executives who have posted copies of the email between Google and Microsoft:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...ccusations.ars
Microsoft tried to team up with Google recently on patent portfolios and Google turned them down. This whiny letter from Google is apparently a fiction being circulated for PR purposes, at least according to Microsoft executives who have posted copies of the email between Google and Microsoft:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...ccusations.ars
There's still confusion about what MS claims. It's all about the old NOVELL auction last year, not the Rockstar consortium (Apple/MS/RIM and others) that ganged up for the NORTEL patents. Google wasn't invited to the club for that one.
There's still confusion about what MS claims. It's all about the old NOVELL auction last year, not the Rockstar consortium (Apple/MS/RIM and others) that ganged up for the NORTEL patents. Google wasn't invited to the club for that one.
The point is that Microsoft has reached out to Google as a potential partner for these patent pools. That seems to fly in the face of Google's paranoid claims that everyone (including Microsoft) is out to get them.
Where I'm from, we would tell anyone acting that way to "put up or shut up". Companies aren't going pay billions of dollars to secure patent pools and then happily share them with Google who, despite being flush for cash, always seem to be tapped out when it's their turn to buy a round. They shouldn't be surprised when they find themselves uninvited to the party.
Then again, we're talking about a company who employ people that can't cook for themselves or do their own laundry. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised when they display behavior lacking in the social graces.