Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Jul 2012 19:38 UTC, submitted by tupp
Permalink for comment 529072
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-06
"From the chart you posted I dont see Google suing anyone."
Yep, it's humorous that the poster would say something that disagrees with the evidence he provided, but he probably meant to illustrate the chaos rather than make a literal statement.
Arguably google entered the game so late that it lacks the portfolio needed to mount a successful attack, but I won't read into it that way - they appear to genuinely believe that it is wrong to use patents offensively.
Um, dude, Google doesn't have the patent portfolio necessary to mount an attack on any of these companies, barring its Motorola acquisition of FRAND patents. They are now suing Microsoft via proxy Motorola over a ridiculous demand of 100x licensing of H.264 patents.
Edited 2012-08-01 02:00 UTC