Slashdot Mirror
Google Reaffirms Stance Against Software Patents
An anonymous reader writes "Google has again publicly affirmed its stance against software patents during an announcement over a potential defensive acquisition. These days, when Microsoft, Apple, and others are abusing software patents, it's nice to see one large company calling them junk."
See Microsoft suing Android users...
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/microsoft-sues-barnes-noble-foxconn-inventec-over-android-e-readers/46314?tag=nl.e589
Microsoft has already said that Linux infringes on "multiple" patents. They are only not suing because Linux is "small" threat, but if it ever becomes significant threat for Microsoft, lawsuits will start flying!
I know. Like when they never sued Motorola or Barnes & Noble.
pontificating about the evils of software patents. Then he turned around and sued his biggest competitor, Barnes and Noble for infringing his one-click patent. Because when push comes to shove, those who have the weapons will use them.
The proper reaction to Google's statement is a collective eye roll.
Nowhere in the article does it say that Google is against software patents. I only see them pushing for patent reform.
Well, we know that isn't true. Try this: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/03/google-android-microsoft/. According to that, an MS rep said, "Microsoft has taken these actions against Barnes & Noble, Foxconn and Inventec because they are commercializing products that infringe our patented innovations.” That pretty much shows your "only defending against patent trolls" to be patently (pardon the pun) false. Microsoft historically has not been quick to sue for patent infringement, but in recent years has been much more likely to go to court. How about this one: http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3807801/Bruce-Perens-Analyzing-Microsofts-TomTom-Lawsuit.htm where they went after Tom-Tom for the patent on FAT32 of all things. You can no longer just claim that Microsoft doesn't go after patent infringement and doesn't attack other companies.
Now, your statement that MS isn't a patent troll is, of course, true. MS hasn't sued people over patents that MS isn't using in devices of their own. They aren't just an "IP holding company" like your normal patent troll. But they have clearly gone beyond the days of holding patents merely for defense.
Because if they didn't file them, clearly nobody else would. Which is the problem, patents are both offensive and defensive tools depending upon the situation.
There are some things to like about Google's statement, but let's be realistic: this isn't a clear statement against all software patents including their own PageRank and Google Doodle patents. They complain about "low-quality software patents". That's absolutely not the same as being against all software patents. It means that they just believe many of those patents aren't good enough. However, the answer that politicians give then is to provide more funding to the patent offices of the world, not to abolish software patents.
I've done a lot of work on patent policy (with my NoSoftwarePatents campaign in 2004/05 and otherwise) and I know that the difference between saying "some [or even 'many'] software patents are bad" and saying that "all software patents must be abolished" is like a difference between night and day. Actually, lobbying entities working for Microsoft also call for more patent quality all the time. That's definitely not a sufficient statement to be interpreted as a call for the abolition of all software patents no matter how "good" they may be relative to other software patents.
It's like saying "we are against unjust wars" as opposed to saying "we should never go to war."
I also analyzed Google's amicus curiae brief in the Bilski case and found that it advocated higher patent quality and raised issues but didn't go far enough to really demand the abolition of software patents.
"Microsoft never has attacked other companies"
Microsoft files rare patent lawsuit against Salesforce.com
Microsoft Slaps Motorola with Patent Lawsuit over Android
Microsoft wins big on PND patent lawsuit
Microsoft Files Patent Lawsuit Vs TiVo Again
Patent Lawsuits Filed by Former Microsoft CTO’s Firm
Further, Microsoft has lobbied extensively in Europe for a software patent regime, funding numerous attempts to modify the current situation where a patent has to be litigated in each country separately. If they were being defensive, they would not do this, the current European patent system favors defense.
And further, Microsoft has pushed very hard, for many years now, to find a way to extract a toll on Linux, via patents.
They are not a patent troll, mainly because they delegated that job to Intellectual Ventures, a pure patent troll firm. They are repeatedly attacked by firms who hold patents, though often it seems Microsoft stole the technology, and the small firms are justified in seeking compensation. But they do abuse their patents, and they do abuse the patent system in an attempt to fight competitors like Linux and Android that they can't beat on technical merit.
My blog
entirely secret?
Have you ever even heard of open source?
Granted, there are things they don't open source, but they do release a lot.
It's easy for Google to call software patents junk when their primary source of income is advertising. They can afford to give all their software away (or provide access to it online, whatever) for free. Microsoft, on the other hand, relies on its software to make money.
These days, when Microsoft, Apple, and others are abusing software patents, it's nice to see one large company calling them junk.
Before you call them 'junk' in the courts of law, where it matters, things might not be in agreement with your line of view.
I will quote Gosling...
"In Sun's early history, we didn't think much of patents. While there's a kernel of good sense in the reasoning for patents, the system itself has gotten goofy. Sun didn't file many patents initially. But then we got sued by IBM for violating the "RISC patent" - a patent that essentially said "if you make something simpler, it'll go faster". Seemed like a blindingly obvious notion that shouldn't have been patentable, but we got sued, and lost. The penalty was huge. Nearly put us out of business. We survived, but to help protect us from future suits we went on a patenting binge."
So it's not over yet...not even close.
Software patents?
Patent/copyright abuse goes way beyond that including the genes in your own body which may be the property of some corporation. And how can a corporation copyright a 400 year old music score and extort money from those who simply want a look? And when taxpayers fund a discovery made by university employees and students, why does a corporation get to take the patent and all the profit?
Patents and copyrights are critical to drive research and new ideas but there has to be a sensible limit. With software patents in particular and the outrageous lawsuits, patents are serving to stifle innovation. Only a very well funded corporation can afford to cope with the problems, and the small inventor/programmer is at the mercy of attorneys.
I defer to Don Lancaster, an early protester of patents who offers thought provoking ideas on the subject:
http://www.tinaja.com/patnt01.asp
Thanks for your patience with this rant
...omphaloskepsis often...
I am not sure what you are smoking but not only is Microsoft suing android users, but they were financing SCOs fight against everyone using linux.
Microsoft is very much in the software patent offensive game.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?