Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 17th May 2014 13:48 UTC, submitted by bowkota
Legal

Apple Inc and Google Inc's Motorola Mobility unit have agreed to settle all patent litigation between them over smartphone technology, ending one of the highest profile lawsuits in technology.

In a joint statement on Friday, the companies said the settlement does not include a cross license to their respective patents.

Good news.

"Apple and Google have also agreed to work together in some areas of patent reform," the statement said.

Bad news. Two of the largest technology companies in the world working on "patent reform"? Translated to Standard English, that reads: "working together to strengthen the position of large, established companies to make it even harder for newcomers to challenge us".

Order by: Score:
Comment by Vanders
by Vanders on Sat 17th May 2014 15:37 UTC
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

Bad news. Two of the largest technology companies in the world working on "patent reform"? Translated to Standard English, that reads: "working together to strengthen the position of large, established companies to make it even harder for newcomers to challenge us".

Can we at least wait for them to state their position before we start the Two Minutes Hate?

For we all we know this might actually be a sign that some companies are finally beginning to come to their senses and perhaps want to stop pouring their money down the pit of patent lawyers?

Reply Score: 7

RE: Comment by Vanders
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 17th May 2014 16:11 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vanders"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Except that the most recent changes they both backed were very detrimental to small companies and start-ups, and very beneficial to large corporations.

Any change in the patent system that we would deem beneficial is - by definition - detrimental to large companies. Hence, they will NEVER be on our side.

It's just common sense and realism.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Comment by Vanders
by kwan_e on Sat 17th May 2014 22:43 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vanders"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

For we all we know this might actually be a sign that some companies are finally beginning to come to their senses and perhaps want to stop pouring their money down the pit of patent lawyers?


"Thank you, thank you! I'm here all week!"

- Vanders.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Vanders
by Vanders on Sun 18th May 2014 00:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Vanders"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

I'll throw stuff at the screen along with you if it turns out it's really Emmanuel Goldstein, but lets wait until we're sure it's not a figment of our imaginations first, perhaps?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Vanders
by kwan_e on Sun 18th May 2014 00:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vanders"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

but lets wait until we're sure it's not a figment of our imaginations first, perhaps?


Or...

...if it turns out I'm wrong, then I'll change my mind?

How about that?

Me being cynical is not going to affect anything. This isn't like "The Secret". People being cynical is not going to change the course of events these players have already decided internally. There is no "Law of Detraction".

Meanwhile, those of us who are cynical have historical evidence to reasonably argue our case.

But if it does turn out to be different this time, then it's no big deal to change our minds.

Reply Score: 7

RE[4]: Comment by Vanders
by Vanders on Sun 18th May 2014 11:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Vanders"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

...if it turns out I'm wrong, then I'll change my mind?


Sure, that's perfectly fine, but don't mock people who are deliberately not making a decision until they know the actual facts.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Vanders
by kwan_e on Mon 19th May 2014 04:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Vanders"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

but don't mock people


I'd call it a gentle ribbing, myself.

deliberately not making a decision until they know the actual facts.


You say that as though there are no facts on the table already.

Past behaviour is reasonable evidence for future behaviour, especially when it comes to large and/or powerful groups of people like a corporation. That is one fact that is already available.

So to say there are no facts right now is just wrong.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Vanders
by rr7.num7 on Tue 20th May 2014 00:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Vanders"
rr7.num7 Member since:
2010-04-30

don't mock people who are deliberately not making a decision until they know the actual facts.


Well, then you shouldn't make sarcastic remarks about people who think there are valid reasons to believe that this Apple-Google colaboration won't turn out good.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Vanders
by curio on Sun 18th May 2014 01:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vanders"
curio Member since:
2010-05-03

In a word, No!
They have absolutely no incentive to fairly reform patent law with benefit to all. They are far more likely to further move us in the direction of technological feudalism.

While patents originally had the legitimate purpose of allowing innovators (big and small) sufficient time to produce, market, and profit from their ideas for a reasonable time before anyone else, today they've become simply an effective method for big players to counter what is called "Over-Production".
Over-production is the effective result of allowing too many of the little people (riff-Raff upstarts and independents) enter a market with competitively priced goods that undercut the profit margins of these big players.
Patent deals, non aggression agreements and cross licensing among the big players are what effectively keeps the little players out of markets.

As Henry Ford famously said: "Competition is a sin!".

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Vanders
by jgagnon on Mon 19th May 2014 13:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Vanders"
jgagnon Member since:
2008-06-24

As Henry Ford famously said: "Competition is a sin!".


Except that it was Rockefeller that said it.

Edited 2014-05-19 13:51 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Vanders
by curio on Mon 19th May 2014 14:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vanders"
curio Member since:
2010-05-03

Thank you. I stand corrected.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Vanders
by bassbeast on Sun 18th May 2014 18:48 UTC in reply to "Comment by Vanders"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Why? We have seen Google being cozy with NSA and taking more and more of Android proprietary, Apple has ALWAYS been douchebags when it comes to patents and throwing lawsuits like ninja stars, do you REALLY think two corps with BILLIONS at stake is gonna do anything other than make it better for themselves and worse for the market, really?

the sad part? if it would have been MSFT and Apple the poster wouldn't have a single doubt, but because one dumbass at Google said "don't be evil" its become a magical shield that lets Google be as douchey as they wanna be and still have the Fandroids come a rushing to defend. they really should give that guy a new Rolls and a million dollar bonus, as that one stupid marketing BS sentence has made every bit of marketing that came before it look like a bad joke. you think Apple has an RDF? Sheeit, Jobs on his best day couldn't come up with marketing as brilliant as that one sentence. Company gets nasty with its TOS, tries to tie everything you do into one big DB? Well that don't matter because they SAID "don't be evil" so its all good!...Sheesh.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Vanders
by Vanders on Sun 18th May 2014 23:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Vanders"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

the sad part? if it would have been MSFT and Apple the poster wouldn't have a single doubt


I would have said the exact same thing: the point is that Thom and guys like you are deploring someone before you even know what you're deploring them for

If it helps your sensibilities, I actually believe that it won't be positive news. The difference is that I'm actually waiting for facts before I start deploring them for something, rather than making an ass of myself by trying to denigrate them for something they haven't even done yet.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Vanders
by bassbeast on Mon 19th May 2014 16:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Vanders"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Congratulations, you are part of the less than 2% non-Fandroids that have been defending this move. Check any forum to see how many Fandroids have rushed to defend Google with it ALWAYS coming back to "don't be evil". Hell type that into Slashdot or any major tech blog and see how many thread are filled with Fandroids bleating that thing over and over and OVER even though Eric Schmidt himself said that was "the stupidest rule ever".

So call me jaded if you want but I'm really fricking sick of hearing excuses for Google using that marketing slogan, just as I'm sick of MSFT apologists bleating "you're a luddite!" and "innovation!" at what has to be the most pants on head retarded UI since MSBob. Oh and just so they don't feel left out Apple iFans? Yeah just because some kid in NJ figures out a hack to jailbreak your phone does NOT mean that Apple doesn't control you, the simple fact that you have to find some malware style overflow or hack just to get control of your own device is proof enough!

So just because a single guy may or may not be following a trend does not mean the trend isn't pervasive, it simply means there is an exception to every rule.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Vanders
by Vanders on Mon 19th May 2014 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Vanders"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Congratulations, you are part of the less than 2% non-Fandroids that have been defending this move.


Except I haven't defended it. I haven't attacked it either. I am firmly on the fence, officially "Of no current opinion", because I don't have enough data to form an opinion.

You were the only one to mention "Don't be Evil" and Apple here, so I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by Vanders
by bassbeast on Wed 21st May 2014 03:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Vanders"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

If someone punches you in the face every day for 10 years thinking "maybe he won't punch me tomorrow" isn't being on the fence, it isn't being optimistic, its being blind!

Show me a single instance of either company doing something patent wise that didn't enrich themselves, just one. hell looking at past behavior should give you a damned good idea what the future holds and from Google taking more and more of Android proprietary to Apple throwing lawsuits like ninja stars I'd say that cynical is the only logical way to be given the evidence presented by both.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Stephen!
by Stephen! on Sat 17th May 2014 15:52 UTC
Stephen!
Member since:
2007-11-24

Apple Inc and Google Inc's Motorola Mobility unit


Shouldn't that be "Lenovo's Motorola Mobility unit"?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Stephen!
by JAlexoid on Sat 17th May 2014 19:29 UTC in reply to "Comment by Stephen!"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

The sale is not final, yet.

Edited 2014-05-17 19:29 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Stephen!
by pica on Mon 19th May 2014 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Stephen!"
pica Member since:
2005-07-10

Why isn't the deal final yet?
What are the problem?
Who is involved?

pica

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!
by kwan_e on Tue 20th May 2014 00:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Stephen!"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

What are the problem?


The fact that there's still legal issues surrounding the unit?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!
by zima on Tue 20th May 2014 15:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Stephen!"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Probably as usual it needs to be cleared by regulatory authorities throughout the world.

Reply Score: 2

Google still gonna help Samsung?
by curio on Sun 18th May 2014 00:47 UTC
curio
Member since:
2010-05-03

Any bets that part of this deal requires that Google renege on its recent promise to help Samsung with its patent cases?

Reply Score: 1

Good news?
by pica on Mon 19th May 2014 07:20 UTC
pica
Member since:
2005-07-10

Is that good news?

Or does that mean Apple, Google und Motorola join forces to fight Samsung, to build a new Monopoly, to further perfectionize surveillance?

pica

Reply Score: 2