
A Google employee forgot to remove Post-it notes and it’s fueling a lawsuit - dlgeek
http://qz.com/250346/a-google-employee-forgot-to-remove-post-it-notes-and-thats-fueling-a-lawsuit/
======
gress
If this is representative of Google's general approach to dealing with
partners, then it should be fully exposed and prosecuted. Google has enough
power and money not to need to act in bad faith like this.

~~~
pyre
I feel like we need more details to start passing judgement. For all we know
VSL is trying to claim that their patent gives them a monopoly over an entire
problem domain rather than just a specific implementation.

If Google had decided in the middle of talks that they would just roll their
own solution, it makes sense to tell their engineers not to touch the details
of VSL's system, lest it influence their own implementation/solution.

------
tdicola
What a weird premise for an article, that a careless post it note is the cause
for the lawsuit. Perhaps Google shouldn't have (allegedly) infringed on the IP
in the first place instead of being annoyed that they were sloppy and got
caught doing it.

~~~
danbmil99
Turn it around: think of Google as a young startup, VST is a big 800-lb
gorilla. Startup is working on something cool; big gorilla comes along and
says "hey, you should buy that from me, and/or license my patents". But maybe
patents are these all-too-common obvious troll-patents, and startup's stuff is
different anyway. But startup would still be rightfully concerned about
(arguably frivolous) lawsuits.

Seems like the perspective changes depending on who plays David and who is
Goliath. Generally, YC crowd is pretty hard core anti-patent, especially where
software and algorithms are concerned.

------
icantthinkofone
A scribbled note on a post-it doesn't mean policy. It may not even represent
fact. I don't see where anyone could go with this.

~~~
gress
It's evidence of intent.

------
hkmurakami
Remember everyone, "Don't be evil!"

 _wink wink nudge nudge_

~~~
allegory
If you think this is evil you want to see how patents are handled in the
defense industry.

Company A copies company B's idea straight from the patent, company B finds
out and confronts company A, company B gets a call from the government (who
are buying the product from company A) saying "cease or we stop contract X
with you".

That leaves company B to fight in a foreign market only which is why you see a
lot of defense products sold overseas only...

Lawyers don't even get a look in.

Edit: just to add, yes this is illegal but try going up against the government
after you've signed various secret development agreements with them.
Occasionally these things do go to court but you don't see it as they are
sealed.

~~~
bellerocky
> company B gets a call from the government (who are buying the product from
> company A) saying "cease or we stop contract X with you".

I'm pretty sure that's illegal, at least in developed countries. I'd record
that call and leak it to the press or something, see how that works out for
them. Government agents unduly threatening retribution for lawful disputes
between private companies is probably a small scandal.

~~~
pyre
I remember reading an article/blogpost about a specific instance that was
related to technology that could be used to tap underwater fiber optic lines.
The company with the patent wasn't a government contractor. They ended up in a
situation where a big government contractor got to benefit from the fruits of
their innovation, while the government basically said, "f*ck off."

