Startup aimed at killing patent trolls gets Google on its side
1. xperiaDROID (Posts: 3742; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
They think Google is a patent troll, but they didn't realize they were the "troll" all along........
Why not Apple? :P
3. Blazers (Posts: 117; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)
Google and Apple aren't patent trolls. They actually use some of their patents. Where as a patent troll just sits on the patent (with no intention of ever actually using it) and waits for some company to use it so they can sue.
5. xperiaDROID (Posts: 3742; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
What I meant by "They" is the company who start the "startup" and said Google is a patent troll, and that's the Unified Patents Inc.
I know Google and Apple aren't patent trolls, but they think Google is a patent troll, they didn't realize that they were the "troll", they are wrong when saying that right?
Same as Apple, if they said Apple too, they are the "troll" too!
10. Izoe (Posts: 89; Member since: 02 Sep 2010)
You misunderstood the article, they didn't say Google is a patent troll.
11. xperiaDROID (Posts: 3742; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
Yes, they didn't say Google is a patent troll, but they think it is, " Now, there's a new startup called Unified Patents Inc. that is aiming to kill patent trolls, and it has recruited a big supporter - Google.".
Did I misunderstood the article?
15. eisenbricher (Posts: 922; Member since: 09 Aug 2012)
Let me summerize it for you.. Google is on the good side here. The new startup is aiming at defeating patent trolls' attempts, and Google is backing it.
20. UrbanPhantom (Posts: 910; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)
There is no "good" side, only winners and losers...
24. xperiaDROID (Posts: 3742; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
Oh, so I misunderstood it, sorry about that!
12. alterecho (Posts: 465; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)
Yeah. People forget Lodsys. The very meaning of patent troll.
13. belovedson (Posts: 811; Member since: 30 Nov 2010)
apple is known having patent trolls work for them
21. tedkord (Posts: 3410; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Apple is a patent troll. Look at the flexible amoled phone they applied to patent. They have no intention of ever producing it, have done zero actual work on it, but they saw what Samsung was working toward, and applied to patent it in order to set up lawsuits.
14. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 4735; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
I am still trying to understand what Unified Patents is going to do to undercut patent trolls. Are they going to cut the number of patent infringement lawsuits? If so, how? By pushing for patents to be re-examined? That happens as a normal course in present patent litigation. Weigh in on the patent examination process? Provisions are already in place for crowd-sourcing patent examinations. "making a group of small companies no longer look like an easy target."? That too already exists - there are 'friendly' patent aggregation companies who attempt to purchase patents in an effort to pre-empt trolls from picking up the patents.
What is the compelling value proposition of Unified Patents? Enquiring minds would like to know.
4. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 2447; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Google has abused patents before. I see this as irony in some ways.
6. xperiaDROID (Posts: 3742; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
No dude, Google didn't do it, Apple didn't do it too. So, nobody's fault this time!
17. loyals (Posts: 129; Member since: 10 Nov 2012)
@mxyz its actually good for both Apple and Google to support unified patents Inc...we have seen patent trolls causing much losses and trouble for true companies like Google,apple,Microsoft ! ...we should hope Apple and Microsoft join them soon !!
8. Zero0 (Posts: 534; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
When making unexpected claims, it is social convention to give a specific example or two.
Allow me to give you an example. Apple has ludicrous patents which should not have been issued, (much less involved in lawsuits) as their existence is contrary to the Constitutional purpose of a patent. Their unilateral control over pinching to zoom is not going to advance science or art, so it should be invalidated.
Not that Google doesn't have equally awful patents, but I haven't seen them suing competitors for a billion dollars over them.
19. Sniggly (Posts: 6200; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Well, we've gotten our unfounded dumbass statement of the day from Mxy. You can all go home now.
22. tedkord (Posts: 3410; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
The rest of us in the real world see your stance that Google is a patent abuser but Apple is not as irony.
7. darkkjedii (Posts: 7791; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Institute it and attack. This crap is killing the innovation engine, and needs to be stopped...
9. Aeires (unregistered)
Patent system doesn't seem like it's completely broken, it is completely broken. When they announced first to patent and not first to invent, the entire system went downhill. Rich companies can now afford to create think tanks just to spawn patents they'll likely never build, but will use against others. The entire system needs a major overhaul.
16. joey_sfb (Posts: 1477; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
To own a patent cost a few hundred thousands i wonder how many basement inventors could afford it.
The system is defunct but too costly too fix.
23. Aeires (unregistered)
Like most things on this planet, it's been tweaked by the corporations to slant in their favor. Grease enough palms, aka campaign contributions, and you get legislature rewritten to your benefit.
25. Zero0 (Posts: 534; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
First to file didn't the end of the patent system. It's the symptom, not the disease.
The patent system is, by and large, garbage. Economists say that software patents are basically a 10% tax. The system exists to protect progress, and it's become about protecting profits.
I say, reevaluate. The consumer technology industry moves so quickly that patents lasting over a decade are absurd. Being the first to market is enough incentive to innovate in a market where a company can go from barely making money off of smartphones to pulling in tens of billions in a couple of years.