Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Mar 2013 23:16 UTC
Google This. This is what we need. These are the kind of steps from which we all benefit. Google has just announced the Open Patent Non-Assertion Pledge: the company promises not to sue any users, distributors, or developers of open source products based on the patents it owns (unless first attacked).
Thread beginning with comment 557097
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Hyperbole
by Tony Swash on Fri 29th Mar 2013 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Hyperbole"
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

'hate of Google' really? I bit of cynicism about this patent initiative I grant you but 'hate'? There is nothing factually wrong about the statement that Google is engaged in several legal actions in which it has deployed FRAND standard based patents. That may be a good or bad thing depending on your opinions but it is unquestionably true. Hence my cynicism.

As to your waffle about unknown and hidden damage done to to the tech industry by IP litigation what can one say to vacuous fact free speculation? It's conceivable that IP litigation has done all sorts of hidden damage to the tech industry just as it's conceivable that Elvis is alive and well and in hiding somewhere. But there is not the slightest shred of evidence to support either proposition. There is however the evidence of many large tech companies making mobile devices and several different mobile operating platforms in play in the market, and I cannot for the life of me see any significant feature or technical aspect of any of those devices or operating systems that is present on one but not the others as a result of IP litigation. Sure occasionally some relatively minor feature, such as 'rubber banding' in the UI say, gets restricted by IP litigation but that hardly amounts to much and it certainly is not 'tearing the industry apart'.

I am not saying that IP litigation is not real or that it does not have real world repercussions it's just that it is so often discussed in a such an overblown, hysterical and doom laden way that rational discourse becomes impossible. IP litigation is a bit of problem, but not a very big one and certainly not one that will decide the fate or direction of the industry or of any remotely major aspect of technical innovation.

This patent initiative by Google will grab some headlines but it is utterly trivial and will change nothing. Google has plenty of IP it will ruthlessly defend just like any other company. All companies tend to think that the IP critical to their operation must be defended but that the IP that is only critical to their competitors should not be defended. So what? That's just the way the real world works and as I say the whole IP litigation road show is just trivia.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[5]: Hyperbole
by novad on Fri 29th Mar 2013 14:49 in reply to "RE[4]: Hyperbole"
novad Member since:
2010-06-10

'hate of Google' really?


Yes really... If you take only your posts in this thread out of the general context there could be a doubt. But your history on OSnews speaks by itself

There is nothing factually wrong about the statement that Google is engaged in several legal actions in which it has deployed FRAND standard based patents.


You're right but... Where did I state something else, or where did I say Google is a philantropic company? I appreaciate THIS move. I think it's positive START and should be extended to show a real advance with the IP "problem"

It's conceivable that IP litigation has done all sorts of hidden damage to the tech industry just as it's conceivable that Elvis is alive and well and in hiding somewhere. But there is not the slightest shred of evidence to support either proposition.


I hope this is part of your "cynicism" or you just lost any credibility.


There is however the evidence of many large tech companies making mobile devices and several different mobile operating platforms in play in the market, and I cannot for the life of me see any significant feature or technical aspect of any of those devices or operating systems that is present on one but not the others as a result of IP litigation.


Each of these not so many companies is engaged in numerous legal actions which cost insane amouts of money that are taken from R&D and our own pockets when we pay the "legal tax" on each device. How many smaller companies without an army of lawyers were sued to hell??? Not being able to name them doesn't mean the didn't exist.

it's just that it is so often discussed in a such an overblown, hysterical and doom laden way that rational discourse becomes impossible.


You must admit that your "style" is not exactly the best example for non overblown or hysterical discussion.


IP litigation is a bit of problem, but not a very big one and certainly not one that will decide the fate or direction of the industry or of any remotely major aspect of technical innovation.


Google vs Oracle / Samsung vs Apple / VP8 / Preventive sell Ban of devices in Germany and many many others...

Well... I would say this is a major problem and that it touches major aspects of technical innovation.

This patent initiative by Google ... is utterly trivial...


I don't think it is but what if??? It doesn't hurt; nobody gets sued; nobody must pay anything for it; maybe some can even use these few patents.

With a bit of luck it "could" evolve to something really usefull for innovation

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[6]: Hyperbole
by Tony Swash on Fri 29th Mar 2013 19:13 in reply to "RE[5]: Hyperbole"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Each of these not so many companies is engaged in numerous legal actions which cost insane amouts of money that are taken from R&D and our own pockets when we pay the "legal tax" on each device.


No they don't. The total cost of all legal costs associated with IP litigation is a tiny, tiny fraction of the costs of the big tech players and contributes almost nothing to the final costs of the products in the market place. Total legal fees for for Apple and Samsung in one of the biggest cases last year is estimated to have been a maximum $20 million each (probably smaller). That would represent one hundredth of one percent of Apple's revenues in a year. Get a sense of proportion.

How many smaller companies without an army of lawyers were sued to hell??? Not being able to name them doesn't mean the didn't exist.


No but not being able to point to any real world examples or any real actual evidence does not help build a convincing counter argument to mine. I say I can see very little evidence of any real innovation being significantly slowed or blocked by IP litigation but I may not have looked in the right place for that evidence, perhaps someone who does think IP litigation is disrupting the industry could offer up some links to evidence supporting that proposition

I am sure that smaller firms find legal threats more intimidating than larger companies but remember the thesis I am arguing against was the proposition that 'patents are busy tearing the very fabric of this industry apart'. Disrupting some small player does not constitute 'tearing the very fabric of this industry apart'. Like I have said IP litigation may be an irritating problem but it's not a very big problem.

I would just ask people to step back and look at the operating systems and platforms that are available, and look at all the various devices that are available, and notice how there are almost no features of any significance that are only present on one platform, one OS or one devices.

99% of the features on any OS or device or platform are present on all others. Nothing of substance appears to have been blocked by IP litigation. Product bans arising from IP litigation appear to be short lived, small in number and transitory in effect. They are fluff in the system. This whole thing is just a storm in a teacup.

Reply Parent Score: 1