EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

07.12.11

Why We Need to Pressure Google Into Putting an End to Software Patents

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 12:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

End Software Patents

Summary: Yet another call for Google to fight against the Great Patents Cartel rather than find ways of joining this exclusionary club

IN A NEW article by Dr. Glyn Moody exists a rather eloquent explanation of why Google should quit trying to play with patents and instead just put an end to software patents, despite the advice it receives from its self-serving patent lawyers. Moody explains that “Android is under serious threat”. But as he immediately points out, “Techdirt’s handy diagram illustrates, practically everyone in the smartphone space is suing everyone else. But the big difference is how the others are addressing this.

“Some are cutting deals among themselves, such as the recent, if still rather mysterious, one between Nokia and Apple. Others, with less in the way to offer in exchange, are simply coughing up licensing fees. Worryingly, that includes an increasing number of Android manufacturers.”

The summary of this which appears in Slashdot says:

“When challenged directly by Oracle over Android intellectual property, Google has proven itself a feisty opponent. So why is it sitting back and letting Microsoft shake down OEMs over its claims to own patents that Android infringes? A disheartened Tom Henderson thinks it’s because Microsoft has been smart to go after the vendors rather than poke at Google directly. Still, he wonders when Google will get into the fight.”

Can we be persuasive enough, even to the point where the PR factor will compel Google to join campaigns such as “End Software Patents”?

The problem is not just Microsoft but also Apple, which now files a second trade complaint against HTC after starting the patent assault on Android/Linux last year (see our Apple vs HTC resource)). To quote one particular report on the subject:

Apple has ratcheted up its attack on Taiwanese smartphone manufacturer HTC, filing a second patent-infringement complaint that, if successful, could bar HTC products from being imported into the US.

The complaint was filed with US International Trade Commission (USITC) on Friday, Bloomberg reports, and was revealed in a brief notice on the USITC website.

I some cases, Apple and Google are both targeted at the same time by patent trolls. To use a similar new scenario (more in Bloomberg about software patents used in reverse), sometimes Microsoft and Google share this pain too. What’s more interesting though is the increased collusion among Apple and Microsoft, which sometimes even congratulate one another on patent strategy, having cross-licensed for a long time, then taken Novell’s patents, and most recently taken Nortel’s patent although that is currently being challenged by federal investigation, as we noted twice before (in the US and also Canada).

“Outgunned Google accuses rivals of ganging up,” says the headline from The Independent (British newspaper), noting that:

The answer, as every patent litigator in the US knows, is Google. It is the only one not in the consortium buying a portfolio of thousands of technology patents from the bankrupt Canadian firm Nortel Networks.

The winning consortium comprised the three big operating systems firms plus Sony and Ericsson, handset makers, and EMC, a data storage firm. It called itself Rockstar Bidco, though it might as well have called itself Everyone But Google Inc.

Android may be winning more ground than any other type of smartphone in the battle for consumer loyalty, but on a parallel legal battleground, Google just found itself surrounded by heavy artillery. The outcome of the auction represents the largest competitive threat to Android since its 2008 launch and threatens to derail its sensational growth.

This is the sort of thing that would happen to desktop GNU/Linux too as it grows bigger (Google has just released statistics showing a growth of 15% year-to-year). Not only “commercial” distributors like Canonical are affected. Based on this new move from Debian, such a decentralised project too is concerned and as the British press puts it, “[t]he Debian Project, which is best known for the Debian Linux distribution, has served up the Community Distribution Patent Policy FAQ, a document that tries to explain patents and patent liabilities in plain English for developers working on FOSS projects. The information was prepared by lawyers at the Software Freedom Law Center and it applies to US patent law.”

Of course, many Debian developers are based outside the US, so these ludicrous laws do not apply to them, except when they distribute their software in the US (which is a large market overall). We really need to eradicate this problem at the root and without support from a billionaire company like Google it would be hard to abolish software patents. Intel and IBM are a lost cause in this regard because, although they support Linux for parts of the business, they actively lobby for software patents and they haven’t as much to lose from them as Google has. Google’s door is therefore the right one to knock on. But it’s important to be diplomatic and polite about it.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

16 Comments

  1. Needs Sunlight said,

    July 12, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    Gravatar

    It’s been a very long time since Google had contact information on its search page. How should one contact Google’s powers that be regarding the mutual fight against software patents?

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Many companies of the same scale are equally discreet and isolated by choice.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Try Chris DiBona [cdibona@google.com]

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    And in relation to Android (not just Open Source, which DiBona is heading), it is also worth contacting Tim Bray [tbray@textuality.com].

  2. TemporalBeing said,

    July 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm

    Gravatar

    In response to a Groklaw Newspick from H-Online, I posted the following there which seems applicable here too. The article was postulating about what Google should do with the $4B USD that they would have used for the Nortel patents, to which I commented:

    Really, the best thing to do would be to take that $4 Billion USD and spend it on Congressional and the Presidential Races to get an law or amendment passed that forbids software patents. Just think – each candidate could get up to $73.5 Million USD (or $36.76 Million USD if they gave equally to both Republican and Democratic candidates). A relatively cheap way to literally buy a law that would ultimately save them a lot more, and more likely than not they would end up being the largest contributor in nearly all cases. :D

    Also posted on Groklaw http://goo.gl/eqjFn
    I would have done so at H-Online if not for their registration system.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Google could help campaigns that actively fight to educate people about the harms of software patents (and in turn make demands to their politicians). Patent antagonists have a good and compelling story to tell.

    Needs Sunlight Reply:

    Such campaigns would be relatively cheap and could be very effective. US patent law needs to rolled back to the earlier times or else harmonized with Europe.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Countries like China are accumulating many patents, so it is more likely that the US will need to assimilate to them, not to Europe. If China builds a strong deterrent, maybe the USPTO will decide (on its own) to rethink software patents and mutually agree to reduce the stockpiles in both countries. Right now the USPTO is a tail (lawyers) wagging the dog.

    twitter Reply:

    I have read of one former USPTO official who thinks the all the policies of the mid to late 90′s were a failure. The idea was to promote freedom in China through trade revenue. Control would be kept through patents and other deals. Of course, the most favorable nation status backfired. The US has become more like China than China was liberated. I can’t put my finger on it because the official kept most of his opinion behind a paywall and charged for lectures.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Competition has driven MIT to counter this with zero-cost option.

  3. Mikko said,

    July 12, 2011 at 5:29 pm

    Gravatar

    microsoft demands $15 for every sold smartphone with android from samsung

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/06/us-samsung-microsoft-idUSTRE7651DB20110706

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Yes, news from last week. Thanks.

    twitter Reply:

    People like Florian Mueller are happy to pronounce the success of Microsoft’s attacks but just the opposite is happening. Apple is demanding $20 and Oracle is demanding $20 and we can be sure the thousands of trolls at IV will be demanding $20 for their inane method monopolies. The fact that paying off one won’t stop the others for asking is evidence that the patent troll business model is already broken and that IP won’t be the next software. Paying any troll is a waste of money because it offers no real “protection” from the next extortionist.

    If you are threatened, don’t listen to Florian.

    please ignore the advice of non-attorney commentators (such as Florian Muller @ fosspatents) because they can be shortsighted and are not qualified to provide the complex legal analysis and advice you will need. (e.g. from one of Florian’s latest posts about the Lodsys patents, any patent attorney should be able to recognize that Florian does not understand the law regarding patent infringement and numerous other issues.)

    Debian advises people to avoid research of patents, avoid speculation of inventions covered and to get help if threatened. The complexity of the area is just more evidence that the system is broken.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Right now we really need to pressure for the US to align with the rest of the world on patent law.

    saulgoode Reply:

    I recall once reading in one of their documents that WIPO’s positions on patents was that they should be limited to only commercial usage. I believe this limitation is honored by most countries, but not the United States (where there is no distinction between non-commercial and commercial use of patented technology).

    While not a fully satisfactory solution, it would be of great benefit to many Free Software projects if non-commercial practicing of patented technology were permitted.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    It’s not clear what “commercial” means though. If a company embeds code that it not “commercial”, is it then “commercial” (BSD and Apple for example)?

What Else is New


  1. Immunity of the European Patent Office and Lack of Oversight Within the Organisation Mean That It's a Rogue Entity Above the Law

    In light of remarks from the Attorney General in the Netherlands and in light of some recent and highly disturbing developments (like Board 28 folding for Benoît Battistelli), it is increasingly apparent that the EPO is disconnected from any accountability whatsoever



  2. Benoît Battistelli and Team UPC Are at War With European Democracy, Which They View as an Obstacle to Money and Power

    Some of the latest hints of the vain attitude which EPO managers and UPC-leaning law firms have adopted, as part of their plan to impose the UPC on Europe in spite of public resistance (or apathy due to lack of information and consultation)



  3. Links 1/10/2016: Linux 4.7.6 and 4.4.23, Blender 2.78

    Links for the day



  4. Dutch Court Rules Against SUEPO (in a Reversal), But EPO Management Would Have Ignored the Ruling Even If SUEPO Won (Updated)

    SUEPO loses a case against EPO management, but the EPO's overzealous management was going to ignore the ruling anyway



  5. New Paper Provides Evidence of Sinking Patent Quality at the EPO, Refuting the Liar in Chief Battistelli

    In spite of Battistelli's claims (lies) about patent quality under his watch, reality suggests that so-called 'production' is simply rushed issuance of invalid patents (one step away from rubberstamping, in order to meet unreasonable, imposed-from-the-top targets)



  6. Battistelli Locks EPO Staff Union Out of Social Conference So That He Can Lie About the Union and the Social Climate

    The attacks on staff of the EPO carry on, with brainwash sessions meticulously scheduled to ensure that Administrative Council delegates are just their master's voice, or the voice of the person whom they are in principle supposed to oversee



  7. Unprecedented Levels of UPC Lobbying by Big Business Europe (Multinationals) and Their Patent Law Firms

    A quick look at some of the latest deception which is intended to bamboozle European politicians and have them play along with the unitary [sic] patent for private interests of the super-rich



  8. Links 29/9/2016: Russia Moving to FOSS, New Nmap and PostgreSQL Releases

    Links for the day



  9. Team UPC is Interjecting Itself Into the Media Ahead of Tomorrow's Lobbying Push Against the European Council and Against European Interests

    A quick look at the growing bulk of UPC lobbying (by the legal firms which stand to benefit from it) ahead of tomorrow's European Council meeting which is expected to discuss a unitary patent system



  10. IP Kat is Lobbying Heavily for the UPC, Courtesy of Team UPC

    When does an IP (or patent) blog become little more than an aggregation of interest groups and self-serving patent law firms, whose agenda overlaps that of Team Battistelli?



  11. Leaked: Conclusions of the Secretive EPO Board 28 Meeting (8th of September 2016)

    The agenda and outcome of the secretive meeting of the Board of the Administrative Council of the EPO



  12. Letter From the Dutch Institute of Patent Attorneys (Nederlandse Orde van Octrooigemachtigden) to the Administrative Council of the EPO

    The Netherlands Institute of Patent Attorneys, a group representing a large number of Dutch patent practitioners, is against Benoît Battistelli and his horrible behaviour at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  13. EPO's Board 28 Notes Battistelli's “Three Current Investigations/Disciplinary Proceedings Involving SUEPO Members in The Hague."

    The attack on SUEPO (EPO staff representatives) at The Hague appears to have been silently expanded to a third person, showing an obvious increase in Battistelli's attacks on truth-tellers



  14. Links 28/9/2016: Alpine Linux 3.4.4, Endless OS 3.0

    Links for the day



  15. Cementing Autocracy: The European Patent Office Against Democracy, Against Media, and Against the Rule of Law

    The European Patent Office (EPO) actively undermines democracy in Europe, it undermines the freedom of the press (by paying it for puff pieces), and it undermines the rule of law by giving one single tyrant total power in Eponia and immunity from outside Eponia (even when he breaks his own rules)



  16. Links 28/9/2016: New Red Hat Offices, Fedora 25 'Frozen'

    Links for the day



  17. Team Battistelli Intensifies the Attack on the Boards of Appeal Again

    The lawless state of the EPO, where the rule of law is basically reducible to Battistelli's ego and insecurities, is again demonstrated with an escalation and perhaps another fake 'trial' in the making (after guilt repeatedly fails to be established)



  18. After the EPO Paid the Financial Times to Produce Propaganda the Newspaper Continues to Produce UPC Puff Pieces, Just Ahead of EU Council Meeting

    How the media, including the Financial Times, has been used (and even paid!) by the EPO in exchange for self-serving (to the EPO) messages and articles



  19. Beware the Patent Law Firms Insinuating That Software Patents Are Back Because of McRO

    By repeatedly claiming (and then generalising) that CAFC accepted a software patent the patent microcosm (meta-industry) hopes to convince us that we should continue to pursue software patents in the US, i.e. pay them a lot more money for something of little/no value



  20. The US Supreme Court Might Soon Tighten Patent Scope in the United States Even Further, the USPTO Produces Patent Maximalism Propaganda

    A struggle brewing between the patent 'industry' (profiting from irrational saturation) and the highest US court, as well as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)



  21. Patent Trolling a Growing Problem in East Asia (Software Patents Also), Whereas in the US the Problem Goes Away Along With Software Patents

    A look at two contrasting stories, one in Asia where patent litigation and hype are on the rise (same in Europe due to the EPO) and another in the US where a lot of patents face growing uncertainty and a high invalidation rate



  22. The EPO's Continued Push for Software Patents, Marginalisation of Appeals (Reassessment), and Deviation From the EPC

    A roundup of new developments at the EPO, where things further exacerbate and patent quality continues its downward spiral



  23. The Battistelli Effect: “We Will be Gradually Forced to File Our Patent Applications Outside the EPO in the Interests of Our Clients”

    While the EPO dusts off old files and grants in haste without quality control (won't be sustainable for more than a couple more years) the applicants are moving away as trust in the EPO erodes rapidly and profoundly



  24. Links 27/9/2016: Lenovo Layoffs, OPNFV Third Software Release

    Links for the day



  25. The Moral Depravity of the European Patent Office Under Battistelli

    The European Patent Office (EPO) comes under heavy criticism from its very own employees, who also seem to recognise that lobbying for the UPC is a very bad idea which discredits the European Patent Organisation



  26. Links 26/9/2016: Linux 4.8 RC8, SuperTux 0.5

    Links for the day



  27. What Insiders Are Saying About the Sad State of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Anonymous claims made by people who are intimately familiar with the European Patent Office (from the inside) shed light on how bad things have become



  28. The EPO Does Not Want Skilled (and 'Expensive') Staff, Layoffs a Growing Concern

    A somewhat pessimistic look (albeit increasingly realistic look) at the European Patent Office, where unions are under fire for raising legitimate concerns about the direction taken by the management since a largely French team was put in charge



  29. Patents Roundup: Accenture Software Patents, Patent Troll Against Apple, Willful Infringements, and Apple Against a Software Patent

    A quick look at various new articles of interest (about software patents) and what can be deduced from them, especially now that software patents are the primary barrier to Free/Libre Open Source software adoption



  30. Software Patents Propped Up by Patent Law Firms That Are Lying, Further Assisted by Rogue Elements Like David Kappos and Randall Rader (Revolving Doors)

    The sheer dishonesty of the patent microcosm (seeking to bring back software patents by misleading the public) and those who are helping this microcosm change the system from the inside, owing to intimate connections from their dubious days inside government


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts