Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Are Google's Patents Too Weak To Protect Android?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the notes-from-dad dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Guardian published an opinion piece written by former-NoSoftwarePatents-activist-turned-controversial-patent-blogger Florian Mueller. He lists 12 patent lawsuits instigated against Android last year, says there are many more to come, and believes that Google's portfolio of only 576 US patents is dwarved by those of Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and others. So Google can't retaliate against aggressors such as Oracle. Consequently — he argues — Android makers will have to remove functionality or pay high license fees, and the operating system will become unprofitable for handset makers. Even the app ecosystem could suffer, he says. Since Google received only 282 new US patents in 2010, the gap between Google's portfolio and those of its competitors is widening further: Apple produces about twice as many, and Microsoft gets more than 3,000 new ones a year. Let's discuss this: is Android really in for so much trouble? Can't Google find other ways (than owning many patents) to defend it than countersuing? How about its vast financial resources?"

9 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm.... by Desler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How much does anyone want to bet that this supposed "anonymous reader" is Florian himself?

    1. Re:Hmmm.... by smallfries · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are better indications that the story is bollocks.

      Argument: Google is being sued a lot because it doesn't have a big enough patent collection to counter-sue.
      Evidence: 12 suits.

      Let's see... 8/12 are suits by patent trolls or companies in completely different industries. No size of patent pool would dissuade them as they do not produce *anything* in the same industry. 4/12 are relevant.

      Conclusion: The size of Google's patent warchest is irrelevant in 66% of cases and the author is an idiot.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  2. Or... by khallow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What makes almost 600 patents too small a number? It sounds to me like a few effective, relevant patents are better than a hoard of patents most which are completely unrelated and exist only because nobody yet has the incentive to contest the patents. The author claims that Google needs more raw patents, but I don't see the case for it.

    1. Re:Or... by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I also can't help but notice that only 3 lawsuits involve Google. A lot of these other affected businesses have their own patent portfolios. So why only count Google's patents in a lawsuit that involves Motorola, but not Google? Shouldn't we instead consider Motorola's patents not Google's?

  3. Let me think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Android runs on... oh... ...Samsung phones and ...Sony-Ericson phones and ...creative device and ...sharp devices and ...benq devices and ...motorola devices ...NEC devices ...LG devices.

    If these conpanies put together a paten pool to protect android, then its enough to sue Apple and Microsoft together to Hell and back (not to mention Oracle is not goiung to make these customers angry). All of the companies sold mobile devices long before Apple thought about it. Even Nokia should fear such a consortium when it comes to patents regarding mobile devices.

    1. Re:Let me think.... by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful
      To me the devices are separate from the software stack. As of now, the only company that has 'bet the farm' on android is HTC and Google. Consider also that though Android is gaining rapid market share, and Apple is seen as a carrier friendly firm, Verizon still wanted the iPhone. Also consider that Google and OHC does require significant compliance with OHC rules, and consumers expect closed Google apps, which has allowed Google to attack those who tried to build a phone without it's consent.

      Which is simply to say that it is unclear whether anyone other than HTC is 100% committed to Android as the primary stack. I think it is also instructive to note that HTC at one time was a developer of MS phones. It may be that the best way for MS to gain market share is to scare phone makes into not using Android.

      It is a complicated relationship. Apple is being sued because it is not part of the club, and entered successfully into a market it is not wanted. The lack of phone experience meant it likely did step on some patents. Google is being sued because in it's arrogance it tried to do OSS independently, not using existing tech and experience. In the search market, which was immature, that was fine. But in the mature phone market, with an old incumbency, MS included, Google and Apple as upstarts are trouble.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  4. Re:pony up the ca$h google by SadButTrue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't forget that it's not just google that can't let andriod go. All of the members of the open handset alliance would be hurt to some degree if android were encumbered. I don't expect the carriers that have the iPhone to care much but Motorola and Samsung should.

    --
    grape - the GNU free, open source rape
  5. Patent Lag Times - Especially Software by Sonny+Yatsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason that Google has comparatively fewer software patents issuing every year is because there's often a massive lag behind filing a patent and having it issued. I've seen software patents that have taken as long as 6 or 7 years before it gets issued due to the amount of prosecution done on it. 6 or 7 years ago, Google was a much smaller (and newer) company with much less resources to file software patents. In comparison, the reason Apple gets 3000 patents a year is because they've been in business for over 20 years.

    --
    My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
  6. Re:We are in the midst of software patent armagedd by icebraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is software unlike any other industry?

    * Extremely low barrier of entry. When you can essentially develop a product for free, filling a patent is often unfordable. Hence, they benefit large established players against small competitors - especially those who don't seek a commercial gain (see multiple Open Source projects)

    * Fast paced development. For many industries, 20 years is a limited period of time. For software, it's an eternity. Patents are supposed to convince inventors to open up their inventions in exchange for a limited monopoly. 20 years from now, how will the H.264 patents benefit society?

    * Patents are not a inalienable right - they're a right designed to promote innovation. Anyone who knows the software industry knows its completely absurd to say that patents are a condition for innovation.

    "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today."

    --Bill Gates (1991)

    --
    Dilbert RSS feed