Google Launches Google Voice, Gets Sued

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

rohitbaran

Distinguished
Mar 21, 2010
446
0
18,930
Did they get their hands upon it the same day Google Voice was launched and hence filed a patent?
Google, you have a mole in your company!
 

gm0n3y

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
1,548
0
19,730
From the wording in the article its possible that the patent was issued on June 22nd, but its possible that they filed for it many months ago. The filing date is the important one. Of course if this has been around for years, as mentioned by others, then a few months doesn't really make a difference.
 

Chadh25

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2010
5
0
18,510
A lot of people don't know this but Frontier Communication Recently Acquired Verizon Communication and Subsequentially All of their Patented Ideas Since Verizon Communications owns almost 58% of the united states phone lines Based off the Acquired Companies such as GTE... Their Lawsuit will be validated. It Takes a whole lot longer then 1 week to validate an invention. It's almost 2 years if it's not a "greentech patent applications"
Google is Big... but Verizon is bigger... why? because google didn't Acquire 28 Companies....Before it became Google. Frontier communications did.
 

Chadh25

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2010
5
0
18,510
Btw the People who keep saying the service has been in use for quite some time. Such as Call forwarding...Call Redirector, Digital Call Center Group Dialing... umm all of that is GTE.. Which was acquired by verizon and now Frontier.
 

Darkmatterx

Distinguished
Apr 8, 2003
29
0
18,580
Someone already posted that the patent was filed Sept 1 2009 which is a BIT better but it still sounds like Google was testing this system out by then.
Personally, there are so many patents these days I don't know how anyone figures out if their idea isn't already patented.
 

dedhorse

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2007
22
0
18,560
[citation][nom]Pyroflea[/nom]Why do people always think they can take down Corporate giants? Google's team of lawyers probably costs more than Frontier makes annually.[/citation]

This has nothing to do with trying to take down anyone. We see this story all the time. Frontier knows how much money it will take Google to try and defend this, and thus will negotiate a settlement that saves Google money and provides Frontier with free cash. There's no reason for Frontier not to file.
 

Chadh25

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2010
5
0
18,510
"[citation][nom]dedhorse[/nom]This has nothing to do with trying to take down anyone. We see this story all the time. Frontier knows how much money it will take Google to try and defend this, and thus will negotiate a settlement that saves Google money and provides Frontier with free cash. There's no reason for Frontier not to file.[/citation]


Very much agree.... Frontier Didn't bite off more then it can chew it probably new the Logistics of cost and Considering Google. New they where going to make a buck in the end anyways. The technology they are talking about is almost an exact fit of ISDN... which has been around for years.
 

fjjb

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2010
81
0
18,580
wow thats like saying MSFT is going to sue apple for inreparable damages because they dropped their sales!!
 

azgard

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2002
52
0
18,580
[citation][nom]twinclouds[/nom]The service was started by GrandCentral Communications, which was bought by Google in 2007, if I remember correctly, then become Google Voice Beta. Thus, this service is at least existed for over 3 three years. A patent usually is considered it is valid at the time it is filed, not the time issued. However, if you check the patent, it was only filed on September 1, 2009. (BTW, it is super fast for a patent to be issued within a year.) In any case, I don't know how this patent is valid against Google.[/citation]

This is close, its actually based on a reasonable date you can prove that you came up with the idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.