To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thats just it though... MPEGLA doesn't own any patents and thusly can't actually sue anyone for patent infringement... They simply manage a patent pool -there job is not to sue infringers, it is to sell them licenses. As such, they can get away with saying pretty much anything they want. In the end it is all empty threats. They themselves have no teeth, their job is to bark.
Until a patent holder steps forward we should just ignore all the yelping...
Edited 2011-08-01 03:46 UTC
My understanding is that patent holders do tell those to whom they make threats which patents are at issue. But they do it under NDA. If they actually go to court, then they publicly disclose which patents are at issue.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure that Google knows that they infringe patents right and left, and knows which ones. Which is why they don't indemnify any of their clients.
An NDA is a Non-Disclosure Agreement. Note the operative word, "agreement".
Patent Troll: "You stole my idea"!
Patent Troll: "I am threatening you with a lot of trouble".
Troll's victim: "What idea is that"?
Patent Troll: "I am not going to tell you unless you agree to tell no-one else".
Troll's victim: "Why should I agree to that"?
Troll's victim: "Since you can't say what the alleged idea was, go away you silly person."





Member since:
2005-11-13
If we're going to have software patents, I think it should be required for a patent holder to name the actual patents in question when they start making threats. For example, 'you're violating our patents, but we're not gonna tell you which ones' is just BS.