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

08.08.11

Google Validates Techrights’ Assertion That Microsoft and Apple Are Part of a Cartel Against Linux

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 4:45 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Patent stooges

Summary: When Microsoft and Apple “get into bed together you have to start wondering what’s going on,” claims a Senior Vice President from Google, furthermore stressing that there is a “hostile, organized campaign” against the Linux-powered Android

THE patent attacks on Google are more or less coordinated as those who sue over Android are aware of other lawsuits and also speak about them. Microsoft, for example, implicitly congratulated Apple on its lawsuits against Android. These two companies also pool money together in order to form patent cartels (e.g. Nortel, CPTN) at the cost of billions. The US DOJ is investigating the Nortel sale based on numerous sources including Microsoft boosters who say:

The $4.5 billion Nortel patent sale to Microsoft, Research in Motion and Apple is reportedly the focus of a deeper investigation by U.S. antitrust regulators. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Justice Department is trying to determine whether the purchase would unfairly hurt smartphone makers that use Google’s Android operating system.

The consortium of businesses out-bid Google for the patent portfolio auctioned off by the bankrupt Nortel Networks last month. The extensive patent portfolio — 6,000 in total — touches nearly every aspect of telecommunications and additional markets as well, including Internet search and social networking.

There are some other notable pieces on the subject and Microsoft boosters try to either predict doom for Android or daemonise Google for buying IBM patents as recently found out and explained by one blogger:

Yesterday I noticed a very large number of new patents listed in the USPTO assignment records for Google from IBM, and made note of them in a post, Google Acquires Over 1,000 IBM Patents in July.

I didn’t expect or anticipate the interest that my post would stir up, though I probably should have, given what seems to be an increased amount of litigation directed at Google involving patent infringement claims, with Apple taking on HTC and Google, Oracle and Google disputing use of Java in Android, Purple Leaf taking exception to Checkout, and other suits.

Given the interest in the IBM patents in a number of places on the web and some conversations I had, I thought it might be a good idea to provide the list of patents that Google acquired earlier this month. Google acquired a number of additional patents from IBM earlier this year and last year as well. I included those in my February post, Google Patents, Updated and Google Self Driving Cars Get Jumpstart from IBM Patents.

Groklaw, which is very IBM-friendly, has a lot to say not only about the patent sale (remember what Professor Webbink does for a living) but also about the Oracle vs. Google case [1, 2, 3] which it helps suppress. It does seem likely that Oracle will be disappointed at the end.

Google calls patents the same as Richard Stallman calls them, based on the headline “Google On The Nortel Loss, Patents As Government-Granted Monopolies, And Plates Of Spaghetti” (source)

There is a lot of coverage linking back to Bloomberg. “Bloomberg reports that Google General Counsel Kent Walker likened patent purchases, and their resulting use, as a battlefield and added that it was hard to find a way through the “mess” of litigation,” says one news site.

“Google calls patents the same as Richard Stallman calls them…”Google claims that “It’s hard to find what’s the best path – there’s so much litigation [...] We’re exploring a variety of different things.”

The seminal report is here and there are second-hand accounts too, coming from many directions [1, 2, 3, 4]:

“I have worked in the tech sector for over two decades. Microsoft and Apple have always been at each other’s throats, so when they get into bed together you have to start wondering what’s going on,” writes David Drummond, SVP and chief legal officer.

Drummond said that Android was becoming more and more popular and winning more and more users, however he added that its successes were being tarnished.

That latest claim is mentioned in this audiocast

“Google Responds To Microsoft’s “Gotcha”: They’re Diverting Attention With A Trick That Failed,” says the Washington Post headline. To quote:

Yesterday, Google wrote a post calling out Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, and others for using “bogus” patents to try to kill Android. Some of the patents Google’s Chief Legal Officer David Drummond mentioned included the ones Microsoft acquired from Novell (not to be confused with Nortel, which happened later). When Microsoft saw this, two senior officials took to Twitter to effectively pants Google. You see, Microsoft had tried to get Google to partner with them to buy the Novell patents — Google turned them down. And Microsoft had the email to prove it.

This diversion/controversy is hinged upon Google’s post which validates an interesting take from Muktware:

Microsoft seems to be the favorite disciple of the Indian Guru. I have been covering Microsoft since the days it made bogus claims that Linux infringes on it patents and then the way they got their OOXML approved as an ISO standard by by hook or by crook. Ever since I take everything that this monopoly say with a grain of salt.

Yesterday when Google blogged about how Apple and Microsoft are piling up software patents to intensify attack on Android, I was certain of any confusion statement from Microsoft’s. It happened, we covered it here. We were expecting a response from Google and it came.

Daring Fireball: an Apple fan’s assessment of the situation
What’s more exciting to see is that Apple fanboys cum blogger are all excited about Microsoft’s ambiguous statement. Daring Fireball’s John Gruber writes, “So if Google had acquired the rights to these patents, that would have been OK. But when others acquired them, it’s a ‘hostile, organized campaign’.”

What more evidence does he need than the fact that Apple has sued almost every Android player in the market over patent issues because the company doesn’t know what the healthy competition is. And Microsoft, like an extortion gang, is going after Android players demanding $15 per unit which is far more than the licence of Microsoft’s own WP 7. Still Mr Gruber doesn’t see any hostility here?

He goes on to say, “It’s OK for Google to undermine Microsoft’s for-pay OS licensing business by giving Android away for free, but it’s not OK for Microsoft to undermine Google’s attempts to give away for free an OS that violates patents belonging to Microsoft?”

Dr. Glyn Moody makes another call to abolish software patents:

As long-suffering readers will know, I’ve been warning about the growing problem of patent thickets in the field of software for some time now. Until relatively recently, I and a few others have been voices crying in the wilderness: the general consensus has been that patents are good, and more patents are better. But in the last few weeks, the first hopeful signs have appeared that at least some people are beginning to realise that software patents not only do not promote innovation, they actually throttle it.

Here is the part where Moody mentions Google while also taking note of these comments:

Finally, a very interesting interview with Google’s Senior Vice President & General Counsel appeared yesterday, in which he said:

“Patents are government-granted monopolies,” Walker then says quite matter-of-factly. “We have them to reward innovation, but that’s not happening here,” he says.

So, as you might expect, I’m pleased that people are finally waking up to the seriousness of the situation. More and more are beginning to talk about abolishing software patents altogether – something I have been advocating for years now. But I don’t think that goes far enough: we need to abolish all patents, for everything.

From Google’s point of view, there is a cartel in action:

Google chief legal officer David Drummond has claimed that Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, and other companies have waged a “hostile, organized campaign” against Google’s Android operating system using “bogus patents”.

“I have worked in the tech sector for over two decades. Microsoft and Apple have always been at each other’s throats, so when they get into bed together you have to start wondering what’s going on,” Drummond said on Wednesday in a blog post.

CNET did cover this because when the cartel strikes, ignoring it would lead to allegation of bias. As more and more reports give room for Google’s plea, more members of the public will perhaps be incited against patents.

Pamela Jones is meanwhile back to blogging and she says that Microsoft breaks antitrust rules:

The trouble with FUD is at first it sounds correct, or at least plausible. So when Google complained about the Apple-Microsoft partnership and the deliberate patent policy against Google, Microsoft’s first response sounded like a killer blow. It said it had asked Google to join them. But… let’s take a little bit closer look, because in doing so, it let slip a fact that we did not know until now — that Google tried to get the 800 or so Novell patents that CPTN, an entity Microsoft set up with Oracle, Apple and EMC, eventually won.

That revelation tells us the most fundamental fact about patent law in the US today — namely that even if you have as much money as Google, you can’t freely innovate and provide fabulous products because the patent thicket is so dense already and the Proprietary Patent Club is joining hands to keep any newcomer out of the competition. And that’s exactly why articles about Google “whining” or viewing this as just a verbal war are missing the point Google was making, namely pointing out that it can be *illegal* to use patents for an anticompetitive purpose. There’s a line, and Google is indicating that it thinks that line has been crossed.

As we saw in the Novell patent scenario, the Department of Justice agreed that the deal was not acceptable, intervening to protect the Open Source community, so it understood the danger and altered what Microsoft in particular was allowed to do with the patents it arranged to buy.

So Google isn’t dreaming. This is antitrust reality and that may be why Microsoft took Google’s initial complaint seriously enough to respond.

This isn’t about patents. It’s about antitrust.

Microsoft’s booster Josh Lowensohn plays ball for Microsoft using CNET as the platform, leading to the illusion of balance (Microsoft is the aggressor really, not a victim)

Another audiocast from CNET touches the subject, but it is too conformist. As it is sponsored by Apple and Microsoft as key advertisers, it is also filled with conflicts of interest. In any event, Google wastes more money on this whole patent bureaucracy while HTC too finds itself needing to put up a fight against Apple, having surrendered to Microsoft. Here is an interesting take on it:

HTC Develops Workaround To Bypass Apple Patent Attacks

[...]

If the workaround are suitable HTC may share them with other partners of the Open Handset Alliance to help boost the deployment of Android.

MPEG-LA and Microsoft booster have posted a silly headline echoing MPEG-LA’s allegations against Google. One of them is in our IRC channel supporting the cartel known as MPEG-LA while the other previously spammed us with MPEG-LA promotion. Google would hate to depend on MPEG-LA as Ubuntu is already extorted by MEPG-LA (the main proponents of MPEG-LA are Microsoft, Apple, and Nokia). One reader wrote to us to say: “The [Ubuntu Forums] thread doesn’t really go anywhere but it does raise the interesting issue of whether any technology is safely imported into and used in the US these days.”

It is worth noting that Rick F., the Patent Troll Tracker, has just had his blog abducted by some cricket spammer. We really need more reporters to expose the shady workings of trolls like MPEG-LA (headed by a patent troll who hides behind a separate entity), which sometimes work at the behest of a "criminal enterprise” using them as a proxy. Thankfully, people are starting to realise how this whole industry of patents really works. It’s repellent.

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

A Single Comment

  1. TemporalBeing said,

    August 8, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    Gravatar

    I’m not sure that the Sherman Antitrust laws are the only thing that Microsoft, Oracle, and Apple have to be worried about – what they are doing could very well be called “racketeering” which falls under RICO, and levies not simply Civil issues (as the Sherman Antitrust law does) but also Criminal issues – which could send Ballmer, Jobs, and/or Ellison (and a number of others in the ranges) to jail.

What Else is New


  1. New Efforts to Work Around Barriers to UPC in Light of 'Brexit'; Behind These Efforts Are Self-Serving Patent Profiteers

    look at who's trying to work around the latest barriers to the widely-unwanted (by the public) Unitary Patent regime and what is being planned behind the scenes, or behind closed doors (by and for those who stand to profit from the Unitary Patent regime)



  2. Injunction Against Battistelli's Investigative Unit (Known Internally as 'Gestapo') Amid Serious Injustices and Bogus 'Trials'

    SUEPO, the EPO's staff union, steps up its spiel in a case against the "European Patent Organization" as defendant and "SUEPO/VEOB" (Trade Union of the European Patent Office) as claimants



  3. [ES] Con la UPC Muerta por el Resto del Termino de Battistelli, No Hay Razón para que la EPO o el Consejo Administrativo Sigan Manteniéndolo Más

    Pensamientos acerca de lo que pasará al líderazgo de la EPO después de ‘Brexit’ (salida Británica de la EU), lo que sevéramente socava el proyecto más grande de Battistelli el que usaba habituálmente para justificar sus increíbles abusos



  4. [ES] El Caradura Benoît Battistelli Debería Renunciar a Luz de la Filtrada Nueva Decisión en Su Vendeta en Contra de un Juez que se Atrevió a Decir la Verdad (Actualizado)

    Benoît Battistelli continúa quebrando las propias reglas de la EPO, no sólo las leyes naciónales, como una nueva decisión ayuda a revelar



  5. [ES] Cada Vez Más Parece Que Battistelli está Escondiéndo ‘Evidencia’ Falsa y/o Ilegalmente Obtenda de la Unidad Investigativa de la EPO

    El porqué creemos que Benoît Battistelli está cada vez mas desesperado de esconder operaciónes ilícitas de reunir ´evidencia´ lo que eventuálment lo puso a él mismo — no al acusado — en una situación catastrófica situacion que lo puede forzar (esperamos) a us renuncia



  6. Links 28/6/2016: Vista 10 Updategate, OpenMandriva 3.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  7. Links 27/6/2016: Linux 4.7 RC 5, OpenMandriva Lx 3.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  8. From Alleged Organised Crime to Vice-President of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Željko Topić's situation in Croatia illuminated by means of recent documents from the authorities



  9. Battistelli May Still be on the Way Out as Pressure Grows in Germany, UPC in Shambles

    Pressure on Battistelli is growing even from within circles that are traditionally protective of him and a long letter is sent to Dr. Christoph Ernst, who some believe will replace Battistelli



  10. Caricature: European Patent Office (EPO) Under Battistelli

    The latest caricature about the state of the European Patent Office (EPO)



  11. Techrights (Almost) at 10: From Software Patents to Novell and to Present Focus on EPO

    A short story about how and why we ended up writing so much about the European Patent Office (EPO) and the impact beyond Europe



  12. Patents Roundup: Bad Quality (USPTO), Bad Analysis (India), Bad Microsoft, Bad Actors (Trolls), Bad Scope (Software Patents), and the Ugly

    A mishmash of news about patents, mostly regarding the United States, and what can be deduced at the moment



  13. Links 26/6/2016: IceCat 38.8.0, Wine 1.9.13

    Links for the day



  14. With UPC Dead for Battistelli's Entire Remaining Term, No Reason for the EPO or the Administrative Council to Keep Battistelli Around

    Thoughts about what happens to the EPO's leadership after 'Brexit' (British exit from the EU), which severely undermines Battistelli's biggest project that he habitually used to justify his incredible abuses



  15. Links 24/6/2016: Xen Project 4.7, Cinnamon 3.0.6

    Links for the day



  16. Benoît Battistelli Should Resign in Light of New Leak of Decision in His Vendetta Against Truth-Telling Judge (Updated)

    Benoît Battistelli continues to break the EPO's own rules, not just national laws, as a new decision helps reveal



  17. Fake Patents on Software From Fake Australian 'Inventor' of Bitcoin and the Globally-Contagious Nature of EPO Patent Scope

    News from Australia regarding software patents that should not be granted and how patent lawyers from Australia rely on European patent law (EPO and UK-IPO) for guidance on patent scope



  18. Patent Lawyers Love (and Amplify) Halo and Enfish, Omit or Dismiss Cuozzo and Alice

    By misinterpreting the current situation with respect to software patents and misusing terms like "innovation" patent lawyers and others in the patent microcosm hope to convince the public (or potential clients) that nothing in effect has changed and software patents are all fine and dandy



  19. Looks Increasingly Plausible That Battistelli is Covering up Bogus and/or Illegally-Obtained 'Evidence' From the EPO's Investigative Unit

    Why we believe that Benoît Battistelli is growingly desperate to hide evidence of rogue evidence-collecting operations which eventually landed himself -- not the accused -- in a catastrophic situation that can force his resignation



  20. As Decision on the UK's EU Status Looms, EPO Deep in a Crisis of Patent Quality

    Chaotic situation at the EPO and potential changes in the UK cause a great deal of debate about the UPC, which threatens to put the whole or Europe at the mercy of patent trolls from abroad



  21. Another Demonstration by European Patent Office (EPO) Staff on Same Day as Administrative Council's Meeting

    SUEPO (staff union of the EPO) continues to organise staff actions against extraordinary injustice by Benoît Battistelli and his flunkies whom he gave top positions at the EPO



  22. Links 23/6/2016: Red Hat Results, Randa Stories

    Links for the day



  23. Interview With FOSSForce/All Things Free Tech

    New interview with Robin "Roblimo" Miller on behalf of FOSSForce



  24. Links 22/6/2016: PulseAudio 9.0, GNOME 3.21.3 Released

    Links for the day



  25. IP Europe's UPC Lobbying and the EPO Connection

    The loose but seemingly ever-growing connections between AstroTurfing groups like IP Europe (pretending to represent SMEs) and EPO staff which is lobbying-centric



  26. EPO “Recruitment of Brits is Down by 80%”

    Letter says that “recruitment of Brits is down by 80%” and "the EPO lost 7% of UK staff in one year"



  27. The Conspiracy of Patent Lawyers for UPC and Battistelli's Role in Preparing by Firing People

    The parasitic firms that lobby for the UPC and actually create it -- firms like those that pass money to Battistelli's EPO -- are doing exactly the opposite of what Europe needs



  28. Patent Lawyers, Having Lost Much of the Battle for Software Patents in the US, Resort to Harmful Measures and Spin

    A quick glance at how patent lawyers and their lobbyists/advocates have reacted to the latest decision from the US Supreme Court (Justice Breyer)



  29. Links 21/6/2016: Fedora 24 and Point Linux MATE 3.2 Officially Released

    Links for the day



  30. Supreme Court on Cuozzo v Lee Another Major Loss for Software Patents in the United States

    Much-anticipated decision on the Cuozzo v Lee case (at the highest possible level) serves to defend the appeal boards which are eliminating software patents by the thousands


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