
Google sues to protect Android device makers from Apple-backed patent hell - kirtijthorat
http://gigaom.com/2013/12/24/google-sues-to-protect-android-device-makers-from-apple-backed-patent-hell/
======
namespace
Interesting times. There is no doubt that the legal punches thrown at Android
have been anti-competitive and kills innovation instead of what there were
meant to protect. For example reportedly Microsoft earns more from Android
than selling Windows phone: [http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-is-making-2bn-a-
year-on-andro...](http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-is-making-2bn-a-year-on-
android-licensing-five-times-more-than-windows-phone-7000022936/). If the
patents were that useful for innovation, Microsoft would have been ahead of
Google by miles.

~~~
rajeevk
What kind of innovation do you see in Android? It has been almost being copy-
pasted. Google copied everything, from kernel (Linux) to UI design and trying
to make lot of money from it and expecting others not to sue.

EDIT: The replies of this comment say that the others (Apple etc) are too
copying and copying kernel in not wrong. Well, I did not say that copying is
wrong. What I mean is that copying is NOT innovation.

~~~
namespace
There is nothing wrong with "copying" kernel. This is what the open source is
aimed at: Infectious growth. In fact that was the right and smart thing to do.

~~~
rajeevk
I did not say the copying is wrong. I said copying is not innovation

~~~
nevi-me
I think you might be unfamiliar with 'open source' and its licensing. Android
is a Linux-based distribution, which means that it uses a Linux kernel.

'Copy': make a similar or identical version of; reproduce: [1] Google forked
and contribute to the kernel. They did not create their own identical version
of, or reproduce, the kernel.

[1]
[http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/copy](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/copy)

~~~
throwawaykf03
"Forking" does not necessarily mean "innovation". Innovation, by definition,
requires something new. "Doing the same things differently" is only innovative
to the extent that things are done differently. (Android certainly did do some
innovative things, just saying that forking the kernel was probably not it.)

~~~
scardine
Yes, but reinventing the wheel is not innovation, it is stupidity. Why write a
new kernel if there is a very good one available? Innovation often is in
taking existing things and combining them in new ways (or improving already
existing inventions, which is what google is doing).

------
jdechko
I'm definitely splitting hairs here, but I think there's a distinction to be
made between a non-practicing entity (patent troll) and a consortium of
companies that pooled together to purchase patents. Rockstar may not make
devices itself, but it consists of, and represents, companies that do.

Just saying.

~~~
gillianseed
They 'pooled together' to buy third party patents with which to try and attack
a competitor's product as they can't compete against it on the virtue of their
own products in the open market place.

Technically you may be correct but I really think the 'troll' moniker is apt
in this case.

~~~
clarky07
Right. Apple can't compete at all with android devices. Those same android
devices that were originally copies of iPhones. Remember that android was just
a better blackberry before iPhone came along.

~~~
coolnow
And remember where Apple got its notification centre from. And remember how
iOS was lacking copy and paste for years. And remember how it only got
"multitasking" a few years after Android did. We could be here forever.

Also, didn't a Google employee basically debunk that "Google had to start from
scratch after iPhone was revealed" claim?

~~~
_Simon
You have a warped sense of time. Multitasking is essentially fast app
switching on the devices. Copy and paste was a nothing feature. I'm surprised
that you left out MMS too since your going down the trite meme route. Here's
some back to Android, although its blatantly been influenced by the direction
Apple took, it took Google until Jellybean 4.2 to catch up with the quality of
implementation of iOS. They also continue to have a problem with fragmentation
that is getting worse by the year and Google fucked consumers by handing
control back to carriers in a bit to gain market share. Like you said, this
could go on and on. So here's an idea; instead of trotting out tired and trite
memes because someone has had the temerity to call out your favourite team,
don't.

Also, link to the original article;
[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-
da...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-
had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/)

If Android was, as you seem to think, not a copy of the original iPhone OS,
why did it take a further 18 months to release anything after the initial
iPhone unveiling?

~~~
the_hangman
> Multitasking is essentially fast app switching on the devices

> Copy and paste was a nothing feature

> ... although its blatantly been influenced by the direction Apple took, it
> took Google until Jellybean 4.2 to catch up with the quality of
> implementation of iOS

I don't mean to come off like an ass (but don't really give a shit if I do),
but you're just positing your own opinions in the place of the previous
poster's opinions, then acting like you've proved some great point. How
exactly are you advancing this discussion? Your post is just as useless as the
one you're replying to.

I'm as big of an Apple fanboy as there is, but you're making us look bad.
Multitasking and copy and paste may just be "trite memes" to gods like you,
but mere mortals like me use both of those on a daily basis.

This is equally applicable to your post:

> ... instead of trotting out tired and trite memes because someone has had
> the temerity to call out your favourite team, don't.

EDIT: And your question,

> If Android was, as you seem to think, not a copy of the original iPhone OS,
> why did it take a further 18 months to release anything after the initial
> iPhone unveiling?

is blatantly phrased as a leading question. You're really trying to make it
seem as though the only reason to not release anything for 18 months after the
iphone announcement was to copy the iphone. Give the the iphone the credit it
is due; it revolutionized mobile phones.

How are you so certain that the question in google wasn't "Why rush to compete
with a product that just revolutionized the industry when yours clearly pales
in comparison?"

~~~
alextingle
Don't forget that the iPhone was totally rubbish when it was first released.
It didn't even support text messaging - which made it a joke in most of the
world.

Fair enough, Apple continued to work on it, and by all accounts (I don't have
one) has managed to make it a fine product. But let's not pretend that it was
obvious to everyone that "Apple revolutionised mobile phones" from day one.

~~~
mcphage
> It didn't even support text messaging

It absolutely supported text messaging—at least in the US. Are you from a
country where it didn't?

------
mikhailt
Except Nortel did use many of those patents. They decided to sell it to
Rockstar, full of owners who are likely licensing the patents to themselves
for use in their products. Yes, technically Rockster is an individual company
that doesn't make/sell any products but it's not a troll just because of that.
It's a troll if the owners didn't use it in their products.

By this logic, any standard bodies would be trolls as well if they decide to
sue any companies that infringe without paying the fees.

~~~
pg
Lots of the patents now used by patent trolls were originally granted to
companies that meant to use them to protect things they built. What matters
here is not Nortel, but Rockstar. And Rockstar frankly seems to me to be worse
than ordinary patent trolls. Ordinary patent trolls are just running
protection rackets. Rockstar was created not to make money but to suppress
competition.

~~~
mikhailt
Google was offered a seat in Rockstar, they also placed a bid, and so on. They
didn't want to.

What exactly do you expect Rockstar to do when several Android OEMs are
infringing on their patents without paying for it?

~~~
magicalist
> _Google was offered a seat in Rockstar, they also placed a bid, and so on.
> They didn 't want to._

This is not correct. You're thinking of the Novell patents. Google did make a
bid on the Nortel patents, but was not offered a place within Rockstar.

> _What exactly do you expect Rockstar to do when several Android OEMs are
> infringing on their patents without paying for it?_

This has zero relevance to a claim of them being a patent troll, as a troll
can ask the exact same question (and usually does).

~~~
_Simon
> _This is not correct. You 're thinking of the Novell patents. Google did
> make a bid on the Nortel patents, but was not offered a place within
> Rockstar._

This is not correct. See [http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/google-
had-opport...](http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/google-had-
opportunity-join-group-won-nortels-6000-patents)

~~~
salient
Jesus. Do you even read your own source before posting? The author seems just
as confused as you are, since he's the one posting the Novell comments, and
saying it's actually about Nortel, when it's not.

From your own source, here's what Microsoft said:

> Google says we bought -- Novell -- patents to keep them from Google. Really?
> We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no.

Also here's why Google didn't buy them:

[http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/04/google-we-didnt-co-bid-
on-...](http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/04/google-we-didnt-co-bid-on-novell-
patents-because-it-was-a-trap/)

> “A joint acquisition of the Novell patents that gave all parties a license
> would have eliminated any protection these patents could offer to Android
> against attacks from Microsoft and its bidding partners. Making sure that we
> would be unable to assert these patents to defend Android — and having us
> pay for the privilege — must have seemed like an ingenious strategy to them.
> We didn’t fall for it.”

Joining Microsoft to buy those patents would've made those patents _useless_
for Google in the fight against _Microsoft_. Google is trying to buy up
patents to _defend against Microsoft_. They can't do that if they can't
_assert_ those patents against Microsoft.

If I may try an analogy, say someone is coming at you with a knife, and you
have nothing to defend yourself than a toy gun, and that person _knows_ it's a
toy gun. How useful is that gun threatening going to be to scare the guy with
the knife away. Pretty useless no? Well that's the same thing with the Novell
patents.

~~~
_Simon
I did read it, that's why I posted it. It seems pretty clear to me. Google
could've, y'know, joined them. Simple really. Surely a better idea than
weaponising them? If you really believe that Google would have used them
'defensively', then you are either naive or delusional. Google knew what they
were doing and knew what the ramifications of their actions would be.

~~~
derscheister
Its about two different things, you know that, right?

------
sethbannon
Sadly I'm becoming more and more convinced that the only solution to the
broken way patents work in this country is for things to get so bad, and these
troll lawsuits to get so egregious, that Congress is forced to act and
overhall the entire system.

~~~
allochthon
Rockstar in my mind is symbolic of everything wrong in the tech industry these
days. I love Apple products, but I love Apple just a little less for getting
its hands dirty in this. Obviously there are other companies as well, but I'm
not as attached to them. If this ends up speeding up patent reform, I guess
it's worth the bitter pill. I'm tempted to switch to Android the next time I
get a phone.

~~~
guelo
Totally off topic but you just triggered a mini rant in me. Apple products are
awful. Just today I was cursing Apple over the ridiculous "lightning"
connector scandal. It's incomprehensible to me how Apple users keep taking the
abuse to the point that they blame themselves for Apple's shenanigans. It's
some kind of stockholm syndrome.

~~~
tluyben2
I have modern android, wp8, win8, os x and ios machines here; looking only at
hardware, sorry but what is better than Apple? I'm in the market here for a
better laptop that the haswell air; the windows ones, twice as expensive,
seriously feel like bad ripoffs. Talking hardware;not OS. Phones I tried to
like but if you sit a long time with a 5s, I dont know how they do it but it
feels always miles ahead. And I am no fanboy but I am getting there; the
competition is just simply crap. But you tell me what to get ; I will get it
and live with it in Q1; I want to like something different here.

About the cable; you mean its no standard? I agree with that the EU will force
them now so thats fine.

~~~
bushido
_> I have modern android, wp8, win8, os x and ios machines here;_

Me too, which ones do you have?

Without the identifying the models, this discussion has no basis really. There
are way too many android and win manufacturers there to decide which
manufacturer, store or bad decision making ripped you off.

An Haswell(i7) Air, costs about $1550, the only notebooks that compare are the
ultrabooks, the exact spec at acer (s7 series) costs about $1500-1600, the
other manufacturers cost $1600-1800. Not quite "twice as expensive".

They may be ripoffs of the mac air design(aesthetic), not bad ripoffs tho.

------
k-mcgrady
Didn't think it possible but this sensationalist headline is topped by the
image of a mushroom cloud at the top of the article.

~~~
cryptoz
That's probably a reference to Steve Jobs declaring "thermonuclear war" on
Android - the sensationalism is from Apple, not the article's writers/editors.

~~~
benliong256
Really? You're asserting that there's no sensationalism on the part of writers
/ editors whatsoever by choosing that headline and that image?

Seriously?

I don't agree with what Jobs said, and he's obviously saying that out of
personal hurt. But saying that this article isn't sensationalism, especially
when the headline says it's Apple backed and not mention anything about a
group of companies banding together ... you and I have very different
interpretation on sensationalism.

~~~
alan_cx
Its an obvious reference to Job's comment. Therefor its not sensationalist,
hyperbole, or what ever, to use the image with this type of story.

Job's comments may well be, but that isn't the article's author's problem.

------
kirtijthorat
Meanwhile, in response to abuse of the patent system by so-called “trolls,”
the House of Representatives has passed a bill called the Innovation Act
(details:
[http://www.gop.gov/bill/113/1/hr3309](http://www.gop.gov/bill/113/1/hr3309))
to fix the worst abuses. The bill is expected to pass the Senate and be signed
into law next year. Significantly improving patent quality is no easy task and
would likely require fundamental changes to patent law, to the PTO, and to
procedures for examining patent applications. New rules to reduce “smash-and-
grab” patent trolling is VERY IMPORTANT and hope our Govt. acts on this bill
asap.

~~~
sigzero
I don't think that would help in this case since this isn't a patent "troll"
but a conglomeration of companies.

~~~
kirtijthorat
You're absolutely correct but I just wanted to bring that topic just for the
general awareness on the "patent troll" subject. Also, I found the following
information on "conglomeration of companies" : In 2011, a group of technology
companies that included Apple, Microsoft, Sony, and BlackBerry banded together
to outbid Google on a bundle of patents from Nortel Networks. This cadre was
victorious, paying $4.5 billion for around 4,000 patents, which Google
couldn’t match. Now the group, which calls itself the Rockstar Consortium, is
reportedly looking to offload some of those patents.

------
throwawaykf03
Saying "Apple-backed" (or "Apple and Microsoft owned" as past articles have)
insinuate that those companies are pulling the strings, which is not
necessarily true. Straight from the horse's mouth [1]:

 _Given the amount they paid and given the on-going issues at least some of
them have with both Google and the Android platform, many reports have talked
about the consortium going on the attack or have assumed that it is the
shareholders that have driven things. This is categorically not the case,
Veschi says. “It was entirely my call based on the facts in front of me,” he
states. “The shareholders got an email telling them what had happened after
the suits were issued.”_

You might not believe him, but it's not necessarily that unbelievable. For
instance, Intellectual Ventures is, in a way, "Google-backed", since Google
invested in one of their "funds" (or whatever they call it). Yet IV turned
around and sued Motorola two years after Google acquired it.

1\. [http://www.iam-
magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=d258542c-dbfc...](http://www.iam-
magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=d258542c-dbfc-4977-9fa7-9f885d95ff91)

~~~
kkowalczyk
We don't need to insinuate anything.

It's clear that both Microsoft and Apple are pulling the strings. They didn't
collectively spend $4.5 billion to just have Rockstar do whatever they want.
(Not that creating a patent troll under any scenario is morally defensible for
Microsoft or Apple).

The shell games provide them plausible deniability only to naive.

They sued Android. Android is a big threat to both Microsoft and Apple.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

~~~
throwawaykf03
In case you didn't read the article I linked, the CEO of Rockstar created
these licensing programs while they were still Nortel-owned and has been in
negotiations for years before Rockstar was formed. This was a long time coming
and all the potential infringers knew it, which was why the auction was in the
billions of dollars.

 _They sued Android. Android is a big threat to both Microsoft and Apple._

Rockstar sued _some_ Android phone makers because it infringes their patents
and they don't have a license. Note that they didn't sue Sony, who makes
Android phones, because Sony, being part of the consortium, has paid for those
patents.

------
throwawaykf03
If the Rockstar shareholders can be shown to have direct control over this,
the DoJ and FTC may get involved. From this interview/fluff piece:
[http://www.ip-
rockstar.com/Press_Releases/IAM%20Rockstar%20A...](http://www.ip-
rockstar.com/Press_Releases/IAM%20Rockstar%20Article%20JulyAugust%202013.pdf)

 _Commitments to the DoJ

The sale of the Nortel patents closed on 29th July 2011, which also happens to
be Veschi’s birthday. But it took another few months – until Spring 2012 – for
the acquisition to receive clearance from the US Department of Justice (DoJ).
Although this approval may have taken some time to obtain, the only commitment
that Rockstar itself gave to the DoJ (and the Federal Trade Commission) was
that it would operate autonomously. This, explains Veschi, was so that the
shareholders “as operating companies cannot pick and choose who we will
target”_

------
twentysix
Slightly offtopic, but Article One recently launched a crowd-funding
project[1] aimed at helping start ups affected by actual patent trolls.

According to the project page,

"Our goal is to launch and maintain a completely free, data-­rich,
up­-to-­date, member­-supported database that small companies can use to help
defend against patent trolls."

They are starting with a patent owned by Treehouse Avatar Technologies
regarding gaming avatars. Treehouse has been targeting indie game developers
using US 8180858[2].

Eventually, they plan to build a prior art database targeting the most abused
patents and provide small start-ups with free access.

[1] [http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/operation-ninja-s-t-a-r-
he...](http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/operation-ninja-s-t-a-r-help-fight-
patent-trolls)

[2] [http://google.com/patents/US8180858](http://google.com/patents/US8180858)

------
bananacurve
>Today, Rockstar employs once-proud Canadian engineers to work as high-tech
ring-wraiths in service of its American trolling operation.

At least they didn't oversell it.

------
DanBC
Mangalyaan cost about $90m.

How many robots could we have exploring the solar system if companies weren't
throwing money into stupid patents?

Like the Banana Equivalent Dose to explain regular radiation we need some easy
to grasp comparison to explain just how much money is being wasted in this
stupid system.

------
millerm
Seriously, a horribly biased "article". I don't prefer this style of
journalism.

------
andy_ppp
Simple solution, the law should be:

A) only companies using patents directly can sue

B) the maximum damages that can be awarded are 2x revenue related to the
patents

This means that companies actually using patents and making a business out of
them can benefit and stops patent trolls.

Am I crazy?

~~~
rednukleus
What about patents that come out of universities?

How do you determine the "revenue related to the patents"?

~~~
andy_ppp
When has a university ever sued someone? Patents generally end up being bought
by companies using them... Unless shenanigans are at play.

~~~
eatfish
Here's the first result from Google: [http://www.cmu.edu/patent-
lawsuit/](http://www.cmu.edu/patent-lawsuit/) CMU vs Marvell.

Here's an article from Stanford law school: 'Are universities the new patent
trolls?'
[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=980776](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=980776)

Universities often (and unfairly IMHO) claim rights on graduate research
precisely to monetize and act as patent gatekeepers.

------
sbuk
Title is misleading. Rockstar isn't backed by a single entity. It's flame bait
and many of you have taken it.

Merry Christmas.

------
beedogs
Wow, the guy in the comments section of the article just nonstop trolling for
Rockstar/Apple is unbelievable.

------
belgianguy
Patent reform is highly needed or patents risk to become nothing more than
minefields that already established players will use to stall - and ultimately
defeat - newcomers and innovation in general, rather than dissemination of
information and furthering of the sciences. Software projects (especially Open
Source) projects that get popular don't stand a chance against these trolls.
Don't think this is just something we need to read about.

Action is required.

At the moment Google/Android are being attacked by Rockstar Bidco, the Patent
Troll King. It owns >6000 (ex-Nortel) patents, which (Microsoft, Apple, Sony,
RIM and Ericsson bought jointly) they all stuffed into the Rockstar Bidco
company that has no other function than suing possible 'infringers'. Given the
vagueness and fondness of the USPTO to 'create intellectual property', this
could be the perfect patent storm and Rockstar's boss said it himself: 'Pretty
much anybody out there is infringing'. Meaning that whatever gets into the
crosshairs of Rockstar, is on the hook for possibly millions of dollars. Who
can defeat a titanic patent Frankenstein as big as Rockstar Bidco? It cannot
be sued because it produces nothing (aka an Non Practicing Entity). But it has
enormous wealthy backers, so it can sue everyone for everything and just sit
it out. In fact, its owners all hold patents on the mobile industry, so the
'urgency' and 'usefulness' of Rockstar could be questioned, outside of being a
'bigger stick to hit Android with'. Google or the Android manufacturers have
no option but to face the lawsuits.

Google will have a hard time fighting them off, but I don't see the Android
manufacturers survive in one piece. And that's exactly the idea: eradicate
Android, make all software development that isn't owned (or graced) by the
Rockstar owners a sticky patent mess, leading to a small set of 'friends of
Rockstar' who can afford to develop software in peace. That's not only bad for
Android or Google, that's a bad sign for software development in general.

Because what if Rockstar Bidco all of the sudden 'feels' that the SteamBox
could threaten the Xbox/Playstation duopoly? What if Rockstar Bidco thinks
that Ubuntu Phone OS is something that is in infringing on their phone
software patents? Who will stand up for them? Of course Rockstar Bidco claims
that they are independent, but that was only believed by fools when they
formed and only idiots believe it now after the other shoe has dropped (Apple,
RIM and Microsoft all attacking Google/Android).

And to the supporters of Rockstar, just to be clear: Google was only invited
for a jointly bid on the Novell patents, never on the Nortel patents. As per
the legal counsel of Google:

Microsoft’s objective has been to keep from Google and Android device-makers
any patents that might be used to defend against their attacks. A joint
acquisition of the Novell patents that gave all parties a license would have
eliminated any protection these patents could offer to Android against attacks
from Microsoft and its bidding partners. Making sure that we would be unable
to assert these patents to defend Android — and having us pay for the
privilege — must have seemed like an ingenious strategy to them.

In short: Microsoft told them it was going to shoot their dog but offered them
to hold the gun when they did it.

The fact that so many frivolous software patents exist is bad enough, the fact
that 5 of the biggest tech companies conspired to create the ultimate patent
troll is outright disgusting.

Hate Android/Google all you like, but such constructions aren't healthy for a
competitive market, they'll just swallow more and more patents, and attack
more and more companies, until nobody bothers because of relentless lawsuits
as soon as something somewhat popular is produced.

No developer will sleep easy at night when this becomes the default, as an NPE
is like a ghost, not subject to the same attacks as a regular business, which
makes it so much harder to defeat.

If software can only be developed by the graces or whims of companies like
Rockstar Bidco, the software industry will bleed to death in an instant.

------
liviu
Google is now crying like a little kid after they tried unsuccessfully to buy
Nortel patents... Pathetic.

