Calling Google's bluff: Which patent is bogus? Why not open source their code?
brianshall.com"Oracle Corporation opposes the patentability of software. The Company believes that existing copyright law and available trade secret protections, as opposed to patent law, are better suited to protecting computer software developments. Patent law provides to inventors an exclusive right to new technology in return for publication of the technology. This is not appropriate for industries such as software development in which innovations occur rapidly, can be made without a substantial capital investment, and tend to be creative combinations of previously-known techniques.
Even if patent law were appropriate for protection of software, due to the large volume of recently-granted software patents and the rising number of new applications, the current patent process would continue to be troublesome for the software industry. Software patent examinations are hindered by the limited capability of searching prior art, by the turnover rate among examiners in the Patent and Trademark Office, and by the confusion surrounding novelty and innovation in the software arena. The problem is exacerbated by varying international patent laws, which both raise the cost and confuse the issue of patent protection.
Unfortunately, as a defensive strategy, Oracle has been forced to protect itself by selectively applying for patents which will present the best opportunities for cross-licensing between Oracle and other companies who may allege patent infringement."
A statement against patenting software from no other than Oracle, before they sued Google. So in principle even they think software patents are all bad, but when they stand to make billions of dollars, they suddenly have a change of heart, and they want to abuse the patent system just like any other patent troll out there.
Why should Google be the only ones to open-source all their patents right now? So they can be even more vulnerable against other companies? Didn't they open-source Android and other companies still found ways to sue them? What's to stop Microsoft from suing Google on search related patents after they open source theirs? Because I'm sure Microsoft has some search patents, too, but if Google open sources theirs, how will they be able to ensure that "mutual -assured destruction" balance if they don't own any patents anymore?
This can't be just one-sided. Either everyone loses their patents, or they keep going as it is, and try to gather as many patents as possible to ensure they don't get sued over bogus patents.
EDIT: And what corporation doesn't use their profits to enter a new business? Doesn't Microsoft user their monopoly profits as you call them, from both the OS business and the Office doc business, to throw them at the search engine business where they still lose billions of dollars?
Didn't they use those monopoly profits to enter the console market where they had to invest billions of dollars to beat even long time players such as Sony? Is that any more fair than what Google is doing?
What about the mobile market? They're using their monopoly profits to throw billion dollars more at that market, too, in promotions and partnerships with (once) market leaders such as Nokia.
It's Microsoft who are being the pussies. They are the ones trying to use any loophole in the patent system to stop Android from growing any further. Why is Microsoft being such pussies and using the legal system or any means necessary, moral or not, to stop Android, instead of competing in the market like everybody else?
It's Microsoft who are the ones crying Android is stealing their mobile business because they were 2 years late to the game, and now they try to recuperate by exploiting the patent system, instead of catching up with their own technology - you know the stuff that really matters in the end - what you have to show for yourself - not some patents on a paper.
You're highlighting the difference between "in principle" and "in practice". Probably all these companies think that in principle the patent system is screwed up; they spend BILLIONS of dollars buying and litigating patents, and most likely every single one of these companies would rather spend the cash on R&D or something more useful. However, in practice a company that does this is going to suffer, and suffer badly.
The complaint against Google is their whining. Yes, they don't like the patent system. Yes, they also aggressively bid pi billion to increase their patent portfolio. However, complaining afterwards that the problem is with the "other guys" is just stupid. Complain about the system, OK; it's a messed up system, we all know that. Complain about the other guy, when you were just doing the exact same thing a minute ago, now you're just a whiner, and you should grow up.
If the others think the system is broken "in practice" then they should also push for abolishing software patents, whether they do it together with Google or separately.
I think the argument is that Google is being predatory with their business, and whining when it doesn't always go their way. They want to be cut throat, destroy other peoples business, but they don't like the blow back. Oh, and they whine about it.
Don't get confused here, Google is as bad as MSFT, that's the point. They even want patents with the same justification as your Oracle quotes. But they're not going around trying to elicit sympathy from people by making blog posts about it.
Make no mistake. Google is a PLAYER in this through and through. They're just spinning everything and trying to pull a PR move about it.
Go out and find me one piece of evidence that Google is actually trying to do something to stop software patents and maybe I can agree that they are doing things differently than the others. But for now their playing the same game as Apple, Oracle, and MSFT. They just appear to be losing for now.
EVERY software patent is bogus - companies rather waste time and money fighting each other over "link phone number to contact" patents instead of actually developing products.
Copyright is more than enough when it comes to protecting IP.
I agree that software patents are BS but this article is more about Google than software patents.
Throughout this whole argument the only party I've felt sorry for are the indie devs. I couldn't care less that Google, who is playing by the patent war system, is not winning. Their major concern has not been the indie dev but themselves. Where are they on the Lodsys lawsuits? No one knows.
If Google is willing to play the game, don't cry because you're losing. Many will not have sympathy for a company that is worth hundreds of billions and controls a de facto monopoly on search.
that account has been suspended...you can read the cached copy at http://fireballed.org/linked/2011/08/04/google/
The link seems to work. This appears to be someone's blog, so what do you mean by "that account has been suspended?"
Fireballed looks cool, incidentally.
One wrong part of this article is that Google ever said they wanted to tear down patent law. They actually said in their blog post that they wanted to buy patents and have the Nortel sale reversed and made illegal (making Google the only legal buyer I imagine). They want to be players in the patent business.They want the current paradigm to continue.
"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."
The other wrong part is asking them to open source everything. They do use the "Open" moniker too much, especially now that they are being restrictive with Android. But they shouldn't be expected to reveal everything they do, even if they should tone down the "open" rhetoric.
This guy calls out Google but admires Microsoft... a company worse on all of his metrics. Why?
He says it right there in the article:
Google hasn't innovated a single fucking thing in over a decade... While Apple and Microsoft and Nokia and Nortel and Blackberry and IBM and many others were actually innovating in smartphones and mobile technologies for over a decade you were busy making monopoly profits in a different market. Now you want into the big global smartphone market. And essentially want all the intellectual property of these companies to be effectively voided.
I don't get any sense that admires Microsoft per se; as I read it, he's just comparing and contrasting with respect to innovation in the smartphone space, and finds Google lacking.
Something to do with pussies, I think. Also...
Apple working on a touchscreen smartphone? [So Google] spend billions from another business and copy everything you can, down to swipes and apps.
Apple used profits generated in one business area to fund a different one, swiping wasn't a novel concept, and "apps" is just another name for "programs".
I also particularly enjoyed that paragraph where he rails against Google for scraping content, claims that it isn't possible to block Google from scraping content, and then complains that if you do block Google from scraping content then it's unfair that they don't show that scraped content to their search users.
Or something like that. It's really hard to tell.