Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo Preps Auction For 3,000 Patents Worth $1 Billion (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Wall Street Journal reports that bids are being accepted for nearly 3,000 Yahoo patents and pending applications. In April, Yahoo moved 2,659 patents into a patent-holding company called Excalibur IP LLC, which was seen as a first step toward a patent sale. "This represents a unique opportunity for companies operating in the Internet industry to acquire some of the most pioneering and foundational patents related to Web search and advertising," Yahoo said in a statement. Those invited to join the auction include "strategic buyers, private-equity firms, and investment firms focused on intellectual property," according to the Journal. Preliminary bids are due by the middle of this month, and the patents are expected to fetch more than $1 billion, according to "people familiar with the matter" who spoke to the Journal. Bloomberg, which also reported on the patent sale, said there was no official reserve price or bidding guidelines. Yesterday, Verizon submitted a $3 billion bid for Yahoo's core internet business. The sale will include 500 U.S. patents and more than 600 pending applications, but will not include the larger collection of patents going in the patent sale.

66 comments

  1. rough times... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at Yahoo!

    1. Re:rough times... by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Or at Google, Oracle is going to buy these and try some Scooby Doo-esque scheme to screw Google over.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:rough times... by RenderSeven · · Score: 2

      Oracle is going to ... try some Scooby Doo-esque scheme to screw Google over.

      "Zoinks!! Old Man Ellison!"
      "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it hadnt been for you pesky kids!"

    3. Re: rough times... by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      LOL good point. They will buy Yahoo and claim Google owes them money because they own a patent and copyright on naming a company after a funny sounding word.

  2. If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by rsborg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm definitely telling all of my friends/family who remain on Y!mail to get out of dodge.
    Verizon and privacy (much like Verizon and security) are more like oil and water.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re: If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yahoo! is better on privacy, though? This is the company that handed over the emails of a journalist to the Chinese government and in doing so, got him imprisoned for ten years.

    2. Re:If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like I will be shutting down my 20 year old rocketmail account.

    3. Re:If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sold my email to Frontier who charges me to be back on AOL!!

    4. Re:If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The technical groups which maintain themselves on Yahoo have already made plans to transfer their contents off despite Yahoo's interference and resume operations elsewhere. There is zero expectation that any buyer or especially Verizon would maintain them anyway although I suspect even Verizon will object legally on IP grounds once it happens.

    5. Re: If Verizon takes over Yahoo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given it was the Chinese government, I don't know that the e-mails were necessary to get him imprisoned for ten years.
      Heck, these day that's true of many other supposedly more reputable governments.
      But I'm with you on handing over the e-mails, anyway.

  3. Stick a fork in it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How much of these billions will go to Marissa Mayer's golden parachute?

    1. Re:Stick a fork in it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your pinkie-sized dick?

    2. Re:Stick a fork in it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A towel in her mouth so we don't have to hear her awful braying, donkey-like laugh?

    3. Re:Stick a fork in it! by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      The golden parachute makes sence for a failing company like Yahoo!. As a new leader to try to save a company is really hit or miss this isn't something most people would want to do. So the golden parashute covers the risk of failure and reputation. Sometimes company no matter how good the leadership will fail.
      I have more issues with the Golden Parashute gave when the company it up and growing.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re: Stick a fork in it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are insane. You are telling me you wouldn't take a CEO job that pays millions a year, unless it includes a golden parachute provision?

      I would love to have her job, even for a month or week or day.

      Yahoo CEO payrate is $200k, PER DAY.

  4. "Worth $1 Billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    yea we'll see after the auction is over...

    1. Re: "Worth $1 Billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bid 1,000,000,001$.

    2. Re:"Worth $1 Billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea we'll see after the auction is over...

      Agreed. Ever since Alice, many "tech" patents are no longer worth what some might like to sell them for. But for Yahoo, saying they are worth $1billion is a good strategy.

    3. Re:"Worth $1 Billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starting bid: US $0.99 [0 bids]

    4. Re:"Worth $1 Billion" by sunking2 · · Score: 1

      I tend to agree. If they are so valuable why aren't they generating the revenue that Yahoo currently needs. If anything, at this point they should be selling off their patents at a rate similar to John Oliver buying debt.

  5. SJWs of the world unite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Mysogynist!! How dare you criticize the leadership of a strong womyn!!

    1. Re:SJWs of the world unite! by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Mysogynist!! How dare you criticize the leadership of a strong womyn!!

      Look, just keep the LBGTQ agenda out of this, ok? Not everything in the universe is connected to trans or queer rights!

      (grabs popcorn)

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  6. Golden parachute ahoy! by Desler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Marissa Mayer is widely expected to stand down as CEO with any takeover deal and will leave with a severance package of around $110m.

    Run a business into the ground and make $100 million? What a great scam.

    1. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by radarskiy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The job of the CEO is to fulfill the demands of the board of directors. In the case of Yahoo, the interests of the board do no coincide with the long-term existence of the company.

      Why fault Marissa Meyer for doing the job demanded of her?

    2. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like there was any other direction it was headed when she took over.

    3. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The whole idea of working harder, or what you know in a supply-demand labor market is disproven by CEOs. Millions would take their job for 1/10th the pay. And, judging from some recent performances by high profile CEOs, couldn't do worse than the people that got the job.

    4. Re: Golden parachute ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least I profited on my put options. Thanks, Marissa.

    5. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by sdinfoserv · · Score: 2

      The job of the board is return value to stock holders by holding the CEO accountable. Selling off the assets is not a value proposition, it reduces long term revenue potential. Meyer failed to produce value , revenue growth, or strategic vision for that matter - ergo she failed her job and will appropriately be held accountable.

    6. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marisa? Is that you!

    7. Re:Golden parachute ahoy! by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "Selling off the assets is not a value proposition, it reduces long term revenue potential."

      Selling off all the assets, reinvesting the capital gains elsewhere, and writing off the remainder is the ultimate in revenue potential to a certain type of person.

  7. SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    enough said.. ðYðYðYðYðY

  8. Patent Trolls by Dan+East · · Score: 1

    Patent trolls are working 24/7 to figure out which patents they want to bid on.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  9. Is it just me by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    or does Yahoo seem to be dismantling their company piece by piece until nothing of value is left? It all strikes me as shenanigans to avoid paying out money they owe or maybe a Bain style investor gambit.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Is it just me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's to fund Mayer's golden parachute.

  10. Just remember Eastman-Kodak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just remember Eastman-Kodak. Their patent portfolio was supposedly worth somewhere around $2B. They tried to sell it as a last ditch to save the company but their competitors joined up and kept the price down. They ended up getting only a tiny fraction of what they thought it was valued at and now there is effectively no more Eastman-Kodak. Granted, Yahoo isn't in nearly the predicament that Eastman-Kodak was, but it still may not be as lucrative as they think.

    1. Re:Just remember Eastman-Kodak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Their competitors? And who might those be? The entire film industry imploded and the remaining players from that space (e.g., Fuji) have survived by doing other things.

      If the portfolio sold for a fraction of $2B, a simpler explanation is that its value evaporated along with Kodak's business.

    2. Re:Just remember Eastman-Kodak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They pioneered digital photography and failed to capitalize it but they held a shit tonne of important patents for digital cameras. They also held a lot of patents useful to the movie industry.

  11. It may be an act by locutor · · Score: 0

    I don’t think management has committed to selling the core business; they just said they’d entertain bids. I could see them selling the patents for show and then Mayer declaring the core business sale is off because the bids were too low. She’ll have gotten the press off her back for six months while thinking of new ways to run Yahoo into the ground. Her golden parachute will still be waiting.

  12. Get ready for the patent trolls in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    3,2,1

    1. Re: Get ready for the patent trolls in by Pop69 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, 1 billion worth of patents will suddenly generate hundreds of lawsuits lasting yeafs with claims of eleventy billion per suit.

  13. Are you thinking of top executives by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Did you by chance mean the top executives when you said "the board of directors"? The board doesn't typically have generous golden parachutes like the key executives do. Board members, who serve at the pleasure of the stockholders, get paid around $150,000/year or so to attend several meetings each year. If I were on the board, I would want to keep getting that money for many years.

    1. Re:Are you thinking of top executives by Gavrielkay · · Score: 2

      I think many of these people serve on each other's boards and they make sure they are all mutually taken care of.

    2. Re:Are you thinking of top executives by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      " If I were on the board, I would want to keep getting that money for many years."

      If you were the kind of person to be on the board that kind of money would be chump change, and easily replaced at that.

      The kind of people who get to be directors are the kind of people to have big piles of stock or represent people with big piles of stock. Their primary goal is to turn a big pile of stock into a big pile of cash.

  14. Buyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Google and Facebook throw in they can own what little they don't already and exclude all comers. $1B is trivial for them.

  15. 90% of Yahoo's value is their Alibaba stock by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > does Yahoo seem to be dismantling their company piece by piece until nothing of value is left?

    There's already not much of value left. 90% of Yahoo's value (market cap) is the Alibaba stock they own. Investing in Yahoo is just an indirect way of investing in Alibaba, with a small serving of "maybe Yahoo has some potential" on the side. Yahoo hasn't been doing well in their business, so the best course of action may well be to sell off assets to other companies who can manage them better. The other option may well be having the assets slowly rot under Yahoo's control.

  16. If I was a shareholder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd be frothing at the mouth. To think they turned down Microsoft's $44 Billion dollar offer 7 years ago... And that was before Alibaba got big.

  17. Trollgasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Register company
    2. Raise money from investors
    3. Buy as many patents possible. It doesn't matter what they are. Just buy, buy, buy
    4. Sue! Sue! Sue!
    5. PROFIT!!!

    1. Re: Trollgasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America is cool.

  18. Yahoo was broken long before Marissa Mayer by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Run a business into the ground and make $100 million? What a great scam.

    Marissa Mayer did not run Yahoo into the ground. That had been accomplished before she ever arrived at the company. Frankly if anything she's done a fairly good job of mitigating the damage. Yahoo lost it's way a long time ago and has largely been coasting on previous accomplishments for the better part of a decade. I doubt anyone could have really fixed the problems Yahoo had. The best solution was always likely to be to sell the company. Anyone with a brain coming into a train wreck like Yahoo would have negotiated a severance package because why else would you bother taking on the job? The long term prospects of the company were poor and anyone with the chops to run the company would know it.

    1. Re:Yahoo was broken long before Marissa Mayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marisa? Is that you!!

  19. Yes Yahoo is being dismantled. That's ok. by sjbe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    does Yahoo seem to be dismantling their company piece by piece until nothing of value is left?

    Yahoo hasn't been in good shape for quite a while now. The only real assets the company had that were really worth much were the stake in Alibaba and some residual business from 10+ years ago when the company was still relevant. A sale of the company and it's assets, together or separately, was clearly the most likely outcome even before Marissa Mayer became CEO. That's the way things go sometimes. Most companies don't last forever and Yahoo is no exception. It will continue to exist as a portion of some other company or companies and nothing of value will be lost. Yahoo hasn't been well managed for a while. The dumbest thing their management ever did was declining the buyout offer from Microsoft for an absurd amount of money. (Conversely that might be the biggest bullet Microsoft ever dodged...)

  20. Amazingly Underwhelming by Malggi · · Score: 1

    I remember a time when the idea of AOL and Yahoo! being brought together into one company would have been the biggest of biggest news. Now it barely even garners a mention in the article.

    I mean, imagine if Google bought Netflix, merged it with Youtube... and nobody gave a shit. It really makes you wonder what the tech landscape will look like in another twenty years.

  21. investment firms focused on intellectual property by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

    Can we exclude those?

    --
    --- Mercutio was right.
  22. $1 billion - right... by zerofoo · · Score: 2

    Patents have no inherent value. You buy a patent because you intend to "monetize" the patent by developing a product or service that generates cash.

    OR

    You buy a patent for use as a legal weapon. The value of that patent is only relative to the potential legal costs of not holding the patent.

    If these patents were worth $1 billion in either case - why wouldn't Yahoo hold on to them and develop them for the benefit of their shareholders?

    The truth is they aren't worth this much - and Yahoo has FA ideas of how to monetize them.

    Yahoo is an old car heading to the junkyard to be chopped up for parts.

    1. Re:$1 billion - right... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Whats going to happen here is that the patent trolls are going to grab these patents and use them to bludgeon the tech world for years to come. It'll hold back innovation and development of technology and make bucketloads of money for people whose most positive feature is that they are complete cunts.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    2. Re:$1 billion - right... by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, when's the last time Yahoo did something remotely novel enough to get a patent on? Perhaps most of these will expire before they can be used to inflict much damage. Then again, the same might be said for most of the Windows/GUI type patents Microsoft holds. Most of what's 'novel' about the Windows GUI (and FAT32's dual naming convention) was in Windows 95. Time's up - or it should be. I'm sure they've managed to get bogus 'reformulation' patents on all of it with each new release...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  23. Sell not grow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Selling what others built, and you were given custody of, takes vision & leadership.
    I hope the executives get a big bonus, and find time to layoff the people who authored these patents to reduce costs.

  24. How good can the patents be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since Yahoo is failing how good are those patents. Yahoo doesn't seem to be making bank with them.

  25. Their CEO should try find the Yahoo BILLING page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their CEO should try find the Yahoo BILLING page

    I have to use GOOGLE to search for Yahoo BILLING page

    it constantly changes from wallet.yahoo.com to billing.yahoo.com to billing.mail.yahoo.com and it is NEVER linked from YOUR ACCOUNT INFO page on their services.

    WTF? and they wonder why they cannot get money?

    It really takes a thick shit CEO to have a billing page TUCKED HIDDEN AWAY from your CUSTOMERS.

  26. LOLOLOLOL by sootman · · Score: 1

    Yeah, that billion dollars worth of patents has done a lot for them -- they've managed to grow their market share to OVER ONE TENTH of Google's, with only a four-year head start.

    https://www.netmarketshare.com...

    But hey, if you want to buy the secret recipe to a glistening 1998-style "portal", be my guest. A billion dollars is a small price to pay to get into a competitive position against Netscape/AOL!

    Unless one of those patents is for a working time machine, the only value you'll get out of them will the the warm fuzzy feeling of helping Marissa buy her eight and ninth yachts when she quits/gets fired/closes the company later this year.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  27. Nobody else scared? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Every time I see a bunch of patents up for sale, it's like seeing a car load of thugs in the neighborhood that you know don't belong there. Sooner or later they'll be trying to extract cash for those patents. Patent troll's dream. Bunch of patents to misuse. Almost as bad as giving a kid a revolver to play with, only with the kid it's probably safer.

  28. BOD typically required to purchase $50K stock by raymorris · · Score: 1

    I've been on a couple of boards.

    Typically, a board member is required to spend about $50,000 of their $150K compensation buying company stock, and hold that stock. That aligns their interests with those of investors, because typically most board members are NOT major stock holders. They are HIRED (nominated) by major stock holders, or more often by representatives of the stockholders, the fund managers. They are professional accountants, strategic managers, etc. People who are very successful are often so succesful because they put qualified professionals in charge, not because they try to make all of the decisions themselves.