Nortel Patents: A Painful Loss For Google

[Guest]

Two months ago, it sounded like a done deal.

Nortel Patents: A Painful Loss For Google : Read more

 

[phatboe]

I don't understand why Google didn't pony up the money and just buy the patents. Android handset developers are getting strong armed by MS left and right to pay up licensing fees and this will hurt the manufacturers bottoms line. With talks of HP licensing out is WebOS and WinMo slowly gaining market acceptance Google needs to do more to protect it's Android manufacturers from litigation or fact losing them to the competition.

 

[RazorBurn]

If I could get a Patent for all the ideas in my Head.. I could be the richest person in the world..

 

[kartu]

This patent idiocracy badly harms progress.

 

[vaughn2k]

[citation][nom]razorburn[/nom]If I could get a Patent for all the ideas in my Head.. I could be the richest person in the world..[/citation]
Just prepare around U$25,000.00 each patent, a patent attorney, and 6 months patience for application and qualification, before your (IP) patent invention will be yours.

 

[gamerk316]

This patent idiocracy badly harms progress.

Thankfully, SOME of it is finally getting fixed, with the US FINALLY moving to a "first to patent" system (as opposed to having to prove you actually did most of the research)

 

[nebun]

google i big but it does not have the money to defend all of it's android developers

 

[bin1127]

Google couldn't had possible won the bid that was 5x what it intended. Google probably didn't even low ball it and went with a honest bid. But a consortium deliberate in blocking the purchase put in an unrealistically high bid that only made sense when the costs were divided up. MS or Apple alone wouldn't have in their right minds put in a fraction of this bid. It is legal, but feels very much like a cartel situation putting up barriers to reasonable competition.

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]bin1127[/nom]Google couldn't had possible won the bid that was 5x what it intended. Google probably didn't even low ball it and went with a honest bid. But a consortium deliberate in blocking the purchase put in an unrealistically high bid that only made sense when the costs were divided up. MS or Apple alone wouldn't have in their right minds put in a fraction of this bid. It is legal, but feels very much like a cartel situation putting up barriers to reasonable competition.[/citation]
don't get me wrong, google is a nice company but is getting a little to big, everything we do evolves around google these days

 

[tomrippity02]

[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]don't get me wrong, google is a nice company but is getting a little to big, everything we do evolves around google these days[/citation]

And the 5 or 6 companies that bought the patents are small? Who cares of Google is involved with everything we do? To date, it seems to me that Google has had genuinely good intentions. The companies that bought those patents are only going to use them to bully innovators even more.

 

[scook9]

It only revolves around google if you let it....no one is forcing you to use their services[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]don't get me wrong, google is a nice company but is getting a little to big, everything we do evolves around google these days[/citation]

 

[dread_cthulhu]

...yeah, this sucks for Google. I'd love to see some more services from them... Bad other companies, stealing google's patents!

 

[robochump]

They are not Google's patents. But I do hate to see innovation stifled because of all the patent/lawsuit issues. It is true that Apple is not happy with Android since it is very similar to iOS but Android being a popular smart phone OS has helped iOS become better and that is the power of competition! I just hope our US Tech companies remain strong and try not to screw each other too much with lawsuits.

 

[f-14]

if you steal an idea or product from some one else wjhy shouldn't you be punished. if one of your minions does it and lies about it to collect a check how is that any different from plagerism on a report assignment you hand in at school to collect a grade other then F from your teacher on your path to getting a diploma?
i hate this society that it thinks it can get out of responsibility for it's actions and says it's the governments fault. why do you think it says " in god we trust" on money and you "swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god" on a bible in a court of law?
sounds like they need to be tested by a polygraph while making that promise.

 

[DM0407]

if you steal an idea or product from some one else wjhy shouldn't you be punished. if one of your minions does it and lies about it to collect a check how is that any different from plagerism on a report assignment you hand in at school to collect a grade other then F from your teacher on your path to getting a diploma?
i hate this society that it thinks it can get out of responsibility for it's actions and says it's the governments fault. why do you think it says " in god we trust" on money and you "swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god" on a bible in a court of law?
sounds like they need to be tested by a polygraph while making that promise.

Mr. F-14, what you've just said ... is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

don't get me wrong, google is a nice company but is getting a little to big, everything we do evolves around google these days

This is like saying Honda is too big of a company because I use them everyday to drive me to work and cut my lawn. There is no arm twisting going on at google. They are big because they provide a service people are clamoring for.

 

[jcb82]

[citation][nom]kartu[/nom]This patent idiocracy badly harms progress.[/citation]

That is until someone else steals your great idea and tries to make money off of it. You'd want patent protection lickety split!

 

[coldmast]

I'm still waiting for the Android M$ tax to backfire

 

[jcb82]

[citation][nom]bin1127[/nom]Google couldn't had possible won the bid that was 5x what it intended. Google probably didn't even low ball it and went with a honest bid. But a consortium deliberate in blocking the purchase put in an unrealistically high bid that only made sense when the costs were divided up. MS or Apple alone wouldn't have in their right minds put in a fraction of this bid. It is legal, but feels very much like a cartel situation putting up barriers to reasonable competition.[/citation]

What I don't understand is, whether or not each company in the consortium gets equal rights to all the patents that they won. But you're right about a cartel putting up barriers to competition.

 

[Guest]

I guess copying someone else work and idea and putting it in your product is called INNOVATION....You buying into googles lies of DO NO EVIL and INNOVATION....

If they really are an innovative company, they should have made Android without using others technology. If they can do that, that's innovation. Until then, it pure BS Copycats.

 

[ART-T]

The idea that there are a lot of fraudulent law suits is ridiculous.

“The real facts of the so called litigation crisis are that for the past two decades the number of patent lawsuits commenced annually has been about 1.5 percent of all patents granted. In 2006, it was 1.47 percent. This is business as usual. Most patent lawsuits, moreover, settle before trial. In 1979, some 79 percent of patent cases settled before trial, while in 2004 almost 86 percent did. Matters are actually improving. Also, the U.S. has few patent trials. For instance, in 2001 only 76 patent lawsuits were tried and only 102 went to trial in 2006. By no measure can 102 patent trials be considered a national litigation crisis. The annual report of Federal Judicial Caseload Statistics, which is on the Internet, provides the factual antidote to false claims of a litigation crisis (www.uscourts.gov/ caseload2006/contents.html).”
“As to the massive numbers of "unworthy patents" argument, the real-world test is how many patents are challenged and the outcome of those challenges. Between 1981 and 2006 the USPTO issued more than 3.1 million patents. In that period, 8,600 were challenged at the Patent Office through inter partes and ex parte reexaminations. The number challenged amounts to less than three-tenths of one percent. Of those challenged, about 74 percent resulted in claims narrowed or cancelled. In addition, almost 60 percent of the relatively few patents challenged in a court trial are sustained. My point is that the USPTO's work is certainly not perfect, but the Patent Office is also not pouring out a stream of bad patents.” http/www.manufacturingnews.com/news/07/0629/art2.html
http/hallingblog.com/are-transaction-costs-for-patents-too-high/