Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo's Own Lash Out At Company Over "Weaponized" Patents

Velcroman1 writes "Yahoo is suing Facebook for patent infringement — and the people responsible for Yahoo's patents are outraged. Andy Baio sold Upcoming.org to Yahoo in 2005 for an undisclosed sum, and agreed at the time to help the company file for patents based on the site he had invented and the code he had written. Baio was hesitant to do so, but told Wired.com that he thought he was helping as a precautionary measure. 'I thought I was giving them a shield,' Baio said. 'It turns out I gave them a missile with my name permanently engraved on it.' He helped Yahoo file for eight patents, four of which were later granted. And while none were cited in the Yahoo complaint, Baio said a handful were now 'weaponized to use against people like me.'" bdking points out that Mark Cuban is sick of the patent fiasco as well but his approach is slightly different. "He's rooting for Yahoo to 'destroy' Facebook in its patent lawsuit. Why? Because if Yahoo collects, say, $50 billion from Facebook and forces the social networking company out of business, consumers will revolt and demand patent reform."

30 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. Mark Cuban: still clueless by billcopc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Destroying Facebook will not result in a "consumer revolt". The users will hop on the next big thing. They might go on G+, where they will incessantly upvote each others "Fuck Yahoo I miss Facebook" posts, without actually doing anything about it.

    Social media is dangerous in that respect, because it encourages people to talk about doing right, in order to get recognition from their "friends", without actually following through. Everyone suddenly thinks they're an activist because they shared some viral pic.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by jesseck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And you square your beliefs with the SOPA/PIPA backlash... how?

      SOPA/PIPA may have never meant to be passed to begin with... if you give the Government an inch, it will take a mile. In that respect, they attempted to take a mile- and the outrage allowed them to take 100 yards instead. They'll come up with another tool, worse than SOPA/PIPA, and use that to grab more power.

    2. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is the danger of declaring compromise to be a virtue. Naive compromisers always lose, and whatever cunning compromiser owns (by any/all definitions) the newspaper usually wins.

      Compromise is a tactic, not a virtue.

    3. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mark Cuban is a moron, and always has been. His major claim to fame is that he found an even bigger moron at Yahoo to pay $6B for Broadcast.com. If Yahoo hadn't given him all of that for no results they might not have had to start patent trolling to survive...

    4. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by Hentes · · Score: 2

      In democracy, a large number of social media supporters worth more than a handful of fanatics.

    5. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by WaywardGeek · · Score: 2

      I've been told that many patents are rejected, but 4 out of 8 sounds pretty poor. I'm 22 of 22, even though some prior art I found made me try to retract one, but the patent officer found a narrow interpretation that let it stand in a limited form. All mine have been used defensively. It turns out that you either have to have no viable business, or a ton of cash you're just itching to burn to start patent wars. The rest of us live in fear of being sued by someone with either no money and a bunch of lawyers, or a huge war chest. Either way, we're screwed.

      Most of my patents are software patents, which I continue to firmly believe should be illegal. We should not be able to patent mathematical algorithms or any stupid list of steps which can be executed by a computer. Yahoo, Google, Motorola, Apple, Samsung, HTC, and several other huge companies have decided to burn all their money in a pointless effort to hold back innovation. If ever their was a time to say "I told you so" over software patents, this is it.

      --
      Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    6. Re:Mark Cuban: still clueless by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      Actually, moron is a bit harsh. He was smart enough to talk someone out of $6B and then hold onto it once it fell in his lap. And even better, he was smart enough to sell all of his Yahoo stock immediately because he knew what a pile of crap he had sold them. Ok, maybe he wasn't a moron at all, just a guy who is much better at getting people to give him money than building anything useful.

      I should have said "one lucky bastard". And as usual, it's better to be lucky than good...

  2. This is why we can't have anything nice. by forkfail · · Score: 3, Informative

    That is all.

    --
    Check your premises.
    1. Re:This is why we can't have anything nice. by forkfail · · Score: 2

      No, this impacts all patent scenarios - to some extent, all software patents are becoming "weaponized".

      --
      Check your premises.
  3. Is this a trend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    High profile employees bashing their own employers over company ethics and purpose - Google, Goldman Sachs, Yahoo, all just today.

  4. Sheeple don't revolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People don't even revolt when stimulus helps unions and banks and congressional pork rather than real people.

    People don't even revolt when gasoline and food prices go up, double, largely because of currency destruction which is a Presidential choice due to budget choices.

    People don't even revolt when police set up random checkpoints on highways, airports, train stations, and their own front yard.

    People are not going to revolt if Facebook stock gets crushed due to an outsized Patent award. It will simply mean Yahoo owns 50% of Facebook. The site will continue to function uninterrupted. It worked just fine with $40m so it will; work better with $5000m.

    JJ

    1. Re:Sheeple don't revolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      sheeple

      This word is used exclusively by those it describes most accurately.

    2. Re:Sheeple don't revolt by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know if I would make the same argument as your parent, but I know I stop reading when posters start talking about sheeple. Invariably, the post contains two things:
      * an unsupported statement that large swathes of the population are being actively mislead by a minority cabal whose goal is to destroy said swathes of the population
      * indignation that no else one sees the dangers in following said cabal, and that everything would be better if the swathes of population would follow the opinion of the poster.

      Finally, those posts also reek of internet tough guys: tough talk about how bad something is, about how bad something will get if nothing is done, and about how people should follow them in revolt. But there is never any action that is demonstrated.

      In other words, when I see the word sheeple, I see someone who talks a big game, but does nothing. And I just move on.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    3. Re:Sheeple don't revolt by firefrei · · Score: 2

      soap, ballot, ammo. Boxes to be used in that order.

      At which point you'll be gunned down by the Government's far superiorly trained/armed army. Good work.

      --
      I remember when Linux was good... too...
    4. Re:Sheeple don't revolt by b1scuit · · Score: 2
  5. Well... by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because if Yahoo collects, say, $50 billion from Facebook and forces the social networking company out of business, consumers will revolt and demand patent reform.

    As awesome as this fantasy scenario that takes out 2 birds with one stone sounds, lets be honest, it's just that. A fantasy.
    Facebook isn't going to crumble any time soon, unfortunately.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
    1. Re:Well... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Facebook feels that threatened, it can just buy Yahoo. What's the value now, $1.25, or is that including a cheeseburger?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Well... by schlesinm · · Score: 2

      If Facebook feels that threatened, it can just buy Yahoo. What's the value now, $1.25, or is that including a cheeseburger?

      I'm sure Google would just sit by and let Facebook buy Yahoo.

    3. Re:Well... by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah! Google would bid $1.25 and a double cheeseburger.

      --
      What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
    4. Re:Well... by ddd0004 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe this is the real goal of Yahoo. To force someone to buy them and maximize their cheeseburger multiplier.

    5. Re:Well... by Sir_Sri · · Score: 2

      You can buy a company with stock. You don't need cash. And you don't need to buy all of it. If Yahoo is only worth 17 billion dollars then probably 5 billion dollars will get you a controlling interest. You'd need to buy from the right investors, but 2 billion in cash and 3 billion in facebook stock looks like a much better place to have your money than 5 billion dollars in yahoo right now.

      This works the other way too. Yahoo will probably ask for 5% of facebook or the like. Suddenly that increases their value as a company to 22 billion dollars (assuming facebook sits at a 100 billion dollar valuation). If facebook tanks they're out the cost of some lawyers time, and if facebook suddenly becomes a 300 billion dollar company they will have doubled their own value.

      5% is a made up number. It seems like it's big enough to convey they point, but small enough as to not sound absurd, but really, I have no idea what it should be.

  6. Re:But you still cashed the check, right? by cpu6502 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (shrug). People make mistakes in life, and then later regret their actions. I'm not going to get all incensed at Andy Baio.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  7. Re:But you still cashed the check, right? by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Informative
    From TFA:

    But Yahoo assured us that their patent portfolio was a precautionary measure, to defend against patent trolls and others who might try to attack Yahoo with their own holdings.

    Assuming he is telling the truth, it is absolutely nothing like your comparison at all.

    --
    "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  8. Does anyone think Facebook deserves this? by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Facebook.... well, Mark Zuckerberg, kind of deserves this. It's well known he stole Facebook from several people. Sure he wrote the code, but he was paid to write Facebook. Yes I know Paul and the twins ended up losing their lawsuit, but just because they couldn't afford to fight a billion-dollar legal team doesn't mean they're wrong.

    Is Yahoo's lawsuits just karma catching up with Mark?

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    1. Re:Does anyone think Facebook deserves this? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Look, Zuckerburg didn't invent social networking and neither did twins, and neither did Yahoo. The twins' case was bullshit, and so is Yahoo's.

      Yahoo's lawsuits designed to pump up Yahoo's share price so someone with sufficiently deep pockets and small brain will buy them up. I suspect Yahoo is hoping Facebook will, just as SCO hoped that IBM would put them out of their misery and make the executives rich. Yahoo was completely fucked over by Jerry Yang, who refused Microsoft's outrageously large offer, and now it's down to this. This isn't the end of Facebook, this is the end of Yahoo. Either Zuckerburg will call their bluff and that will be it and whatever value is left in the company will be sold piecemeal to the highest bidders. But the company, well, it's worth shit. For chrissakes they're renting Bing as their search engine. They're utterly pointless.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  9. The vast majority of patents are just ... by Skapare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... used as economic and financial TERRORISM by big corporations.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:The vast majority of patents are just ... by martin-boundary · · Score: 2

      If you object to patent law then you should also object to anti-trust law.

      Eh? If you object to monopolies, you should object to breaking up monopolies? Makes no sense.

  10. Only if happens soon enough by hamalnamal · · Score: 2

    I agree with Mark Cuban, but only if it happens soon enough. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but there does seem to be a certain lifetime for social networking platforms (and facebook may or may not be reaching its own as shown by declining membership numbers in its initial markets), so they would have to win their suits before facebook collapses on its own, otherwise they end up with no money and no outrage from consumers.

  11. Tell it to Alfred Nobel by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Inventor of Dynamite and the conscience easing Nobel Peace prize. Virtually every weapon is built upon something invented for peace. Forged metal works for plowshares and well as swords. You can't expect a promise like "do no evil" to assure that the future fate of developments made under that banner won't turn evil when sold. Dynamite was revolutionary to safe mining. And at the time it was thought might even end war since the prospect was so terrifying.

    But I think the real prize here is neither of the options. that is to say Yahoo won't land a killer blow. All it needs to do is win even a token amount.

    Then they can sell this "technology" to Google+. This will allow Google+ to be indemnified as it encroaches on Facebook, and also for google to shut out other competitors from apple or amazon that crop up.

    Tat outcome would be good in the sense it would provide competition for Facebook. THat's good for everyone. But it's bad from a general competition point of view

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  12. Really? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

    'I thought I was giving them a shield,'

    Yeah, this country came along and asked me to make them a nuclear weapon, but promised they'd only use it if they were attacked. So I made it for them. And now that they're on the verge of collapse they're using it to extort their neighbours.

    Who's surprised? Patents aren't defensive.