ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King
Home / News & Blogs / Between the Lines

HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits

By | September 8, 2011, 5:24am PDT

Summary: When Google closes the Motorola Mobility deal it will get 17,000 patents. That arsenal is likely to be enough for Google to open a patent candy store. It will be handing out patents like Gummy Bears.

The wireless industry patent wars are entering a strange new phase where intellectual property is being handed around like ammunition and the holding period really doesn’t matter. It’s all about launching the patent grenades.

In this new phase, Google is happy to be a patent arms dealer to its allies, who are all being sued by Apple.

The big patent flap of the day—actually there are more like three including HTC vs. Apple, Oracle vs. Google and Apple vs. Samsung—revolves around HTC suing Apple with nine patents obtained by Google, according to Bloomberg. HTC told AllThingsD it paid Google for the patents, but the sum isn’t disclosed. HTC could have paid a dollar or a few million. My bet is on the former.

You see where this is going. When Google closes the Motorola Mobility deal it will get 17,000 patents. That arsenal is likely to be enough for Google to open a patent candy store. It will be handing out patents like Gummy Bears.

It’s pretty easy to see Google’s patent store sales pitch. It would go something like this:

Apple got you down? Apple trying to sue your face off? Don’t worry says Google. For a small fee—just to keep it on the up and up—we’ll rent you a patent to countersue. Here’s your magic patent.

What’s odd about this is that the companies building their patent stockpiles are all acquiring them through some other company. These patents often cross through many hands. The innovation argument is a bit questionable. Should there be a holding period before you can sue someone over a patent? Can you really have a patent for a few hours and start lobbing lawsuits?

Like all things patent, this rent-a-patent strategy is a bit strange, but not totally unexpected. The good news is that all these patent lawsuits and counterstrikes may just equate to a detente at some point. The Google axis and Apple will each have enough patents to assure mutual destruction. Nilay Patel raises the largest question in the patent wars: Why doesn’t Google sue Apple? We may get an answer to that question once the Motorola Mobility deal closes.

Related:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Between the Lines”

Topics

Google Inc., Lawsuit, Patent, HTC Corp., Apple Inc., Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

64
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
decryobliviots 11th Sep
1. There should have never been a single patent issued for software. Ever. This applies to all processes, as well. At best, software is entitled to copyright protection; processes are deserving of no IP protection whatsoever - they are called trade secrets.

2. 'Look and feel' issues with regard to patents are BS, plain and simple.

3. Patents should give the original inventor(s) protection for no more than 10 years...and only if there is an actual device in use employing the patent. If a company can't recoup any investment in the lease of a patent in 10 years, it wasn't worth the trouble in the first place. If it is only a 'concept' patent (these were never allowed when the patent process was instituted), the patent should be limited to 5 years, with extended protection to 10 years if a device utilizing the patent goes into production...use it or lose it.

4. There should be no 'secret' devices covered by a patent.

5. No entity, corporate or otherwise, should be allowed to purchase a patent. Patents should belong only to the real person or persons who invented the device. They can have a pre-discovery agreement under which employers can exclusively lease patent rights, but the lessee should not have the right to resell or re-lease these rights to third parties.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Return_of_the_jedi Updated - 8th Sep
Where is Zdnet's daily quote/link for FM?

PS. Your Google article is not credible with out.
0 Votes
+ -
LOL
The Linux Geek 8th Sep
@Return_of_the_jedi
and yet that dude shilling for the axis of evil software had his piece on this topic before zdnet.
0 Votes
+ -
Staff
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Larry Dignan 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek Boy you guys just love Florian. Ed had a link to him last night I believe. Guess that makes it credible. wink
0 Votes
+ -
So be it
Tim Patterson Updated - 8th Sep
The patent system is a huge corrupt joke.

If this is what Google must do to play this sad game then so be it. More power to 'em.

Unfortunately large companies seem to believe that they are entitled to retain their positions regardless of free market forces such as real innovation and competition. They take full advantage of a system which has been corrupted largely by them to artificially maintain their dominant positions. They have stifled the truly innovative by erecting massive barriers to entry. They have manipulated governments and legislation in order to have the 'tools' to destroy small innovators who are perceived threats.

We've all heard the stories of innovative folks who had ingenious ideas who started in a garage and became huge successes. Companies like Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, are doing their best (or worst) to make sure that this never happens again.
0 Votes
+ -
What's with the entitlement attitude?
techconc 8th Sep
@Tim Patterson

Nobody likes to see lawsuits. They are disruptive. However, I don't get the attitude that companies don't have a right to protect their intellectual property that took years of research and lot's of money to develop. You claim that companies that protect their IP are stifling innovation. How, by not simply allowing others to freely copy their hard work? What incentive do companies have to spend money on R&D if it's not protected? If it's easily copied by a competitor that happens to have a better handle on supply chain, you're screwed. Companies, big or small are not entitled to steal from others. If Apple is stealing, they should pay. If HTC is stealing, they should pay... same for Google, etc.

The issue here is that HTC has no real patents as they've done no real innovation. They are simply buying patents on the cheap from Google in order to try to fend off Apple's legal attacks. My guess is that it won't be enough as Apple's arsenal of IP significantly outweighs HTCs or Google's.

Small startups that do want to innovate, simply have to license patents like everyone else. As for HTC, why are they okay with giving Microsoft a ransome for their IP, but not Apple? Google is giving away their IP encumbered product for free. Apple, Microsoft and others are simply making the point that they're no such thing as a "free" lunch. You're going to pay one way or the other, like it or not. Even Google is paying big time... How long will it take for Google to recoup the $12.5 billion wasted on Motorola? A very long time...
0 Votes
+ -
Actually there is a big difference
toddybottom 8th Sep
@techconc
" As for HTC, why are they okay with giving Microsoft a ransome for their IP, but not Apple?"

MS's offer to HTC:
"You can keep using our IP, you just have to pay us."

Apple's offer to HTC:
"Stop selling your products to consumers. We will not accept any payment."

Apple does not (as a rule) license their IP. MS does.
0 Votes
+ -
*Their*?
guihombre Updated - 8th Sep
"I don't get the attitude that companies don't have a right to protect their intellectual property that took years of research and lot's of money to develop"

The problem being the word 'their'.

The whole system of patents for inventions breaks down when you issue patents to people who AREN'T the inventor, WEREN'T the first to invent, or HAVEN'T even specified their invention in any clarity that it could ever be a definition, let alone a manufactured thing.

Apple didn't invent simple harmonic motion in Gui's, yet they have a patent on it, HTC invented nothing yet here they are countersuing.

Why is 'America Invents act' trying to legalize patent trolling? They're about to change it to 'first to patent' WITHOUT also adding 'must not already be disclosed', so literally I can see something, write it down, patent it, and say 'I invented it separately' and they want to make that legal????

The whole patent system has been a joke for a decade now, and so many lawyers are making money off it that nobody wants to really fix it.

Meanwhile US makes nothing, even Apple is hiring it's designers abroad now. Instead of Google and Apple fighting it out in the market and killing the competitors in the process, Google and Apple are fighting it out in the COURTS and blocking each other to the gain of others.
0 Votes
+ -
Your entire argument may be based on a fallacy
Cayble Updated - 8th Sep
@techconc

You say:
" I don't get the attitude that companies don't have a right to protect their intellectual property that took years of research and lot's of money to develop"

What you just said there, in many cases isn't exactly so. Sure it can take a long time and lots of work to develop a product. But its not unusual for one singular product to encompass numerous patents. Patents are supposed to exist due to someone developing a particular invention of a sort that took true creativity that wouldn't be replicated by just about anyone else educated in the field of work who might try and resolve the same problem. A patent is not supposed to be that you simply come up with the most obvious solution, even if it took a lot of work to get there. Patent ownership is not supposed to hogtie an entire industry from using the most obvious and convenient solutions to technical problems. Patents are not supposed to be given out for no other reason then you got to the patent office with an idea first, the idea is supposed to reflect a unique level of creativity that wouldn't simply be replicated by anyone working on the same problem.

The problem is that for many years now in the high tech industry in particular, it appears that truckloads of patents have been given out that may have taken some hard wok to produce the specific "invention" but its roughly the same solution most people would have come up with if they were working on it. The problem arises of course when company number two tries to come out with a competing product and lo and behold many of their solutions to various issues are pretty much the same as the company who made it to the patent office first. Its typically not involving any kind of direct stealing of someones ideas, its simply that when the easiest solutions work best its commonplace for different people who are educated in a particular field to come up with similar ideas. Think about that.

In some industries, certain professionals are actually supposed to come up with the same solutions as others in their field. But it appears that when something is a "patentable" kind of idea, the people at the patent office apparently have no clue that similarly educated people will typically come up with similar ideas when the idea is the simplest solution and it works well. And because nobody at the patent office seems to have a clue what is a truly inventive and unique solution to issues in the high tech industry, the patent office's solution appears to be to simply give a patent out for any idea they have never seen before without any clue that if it were the world of food by analogy for example, they would be giving out a patent for a frankfurter on a stick. Or maybe a squeezable ketchup bottle. Maybe a salt shaker with larger holes in the lid for people who like using extra salt. Sure the first time someone came up with those ideas, they were new, but not particularly inventive really.

A common problem is that in IT and high tech generally, you have had many forward looking individuals over the years who looked a little far too forward and cobbled up various ideas and bits of software to accomplish particular things that at the time didn't really need doing, or that nobody was interested in at the time, and they patented those ideas. Years later the due to other new inventions coming along the need for the older invention finally comes to fruition. But of course now there are many competitors and all their big brains come up with the same software/hardware solutions and again, lo and behold Buddy who made it to the patent office years ago, when the idea was a white elephant that had no real application at the time, well Buddy is now rich because he sat down and "thought up" this simple and obvious solution back when nobody needed it. Now everyone needs it and its the obvious solution but its been patented. Ludicrous.

How does all this stifle innovation? Well, more often then not, its not these crap box patents that bring a whole lot of genius to a product because quite frankly anyone working in the area could have thought them up. The true innovation is how these patented ideas are combined into a slick user friendly product at a reasonable price.

If you prevent companies from using simple effective ideas in their products, you are essentially FORCING them to do one of three things;

1. Try to reinvent the wheel to be different then a wheel but do the same thing as a wheel just as well or better then a wheel.

2. License the patent for the wheel off of the company who made it to the patent office first with the wheel invention.

3. Don't make anything that will need a wheel or anything close enough to a wheel that will get you sued for using wheels.

All the above three stifles innovation. Its not a hard question.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
techconc 8th Sep
@toddybottom:
Good points... I was actually thinking that when I wrote my post. Still, everything is negotiable. Apple doesn't care about protecting many of the specific patents that they have provide their competitors aren't quite so blatant with what they are copying. That is, if they stuck to slider or qwerty style phones and didn't use multi-touch so heavily, I seriously doubt Apple would care about the other items. The fact that HTCs and the Samsungs of the world so blatantly copy Apple's general designs and directions forces Apple to use go after them in a big way. Honestly, I don't blame them either.

@guihombre:
I'm not defending the patent process as it exists today. Yes, agreed, clearly, it's broken. I do however, defend the right to defend one's IP in principle. I think far to many items are deemed patentable. That however is an entirely separate problem and the answer to that problem isn't simply to eliminate patents altogether. Yes, patent reform is needed, but until that happens all companies are playing by the same rules.

@Cayble:
Yes, agreed... as mentioned, patent reform is needed. There should be laws to prevent patent trolls, truly trivial items shouldn't be patentable, etc.

On the other hand, complex problems can often have simple solutions. These simple solutions often do look simple in hindsight, but are not necessarily obvious prior to the invention / patent application. How does one distinguish that from something that just is truly obvious? I don't know, but I do believe there is a difference and they need to be treated differently.

All the same, none of this contradicts the validity of protecting what is truly intellectual property. Further, in the long run, I also believe that no protection of IP leads to nothing but open source. Open source is great for many things, but there is much more innovation when there are financial incentives involved. Also, think about it, why would a company spend a billion dollars on R&D for a product just to have another company quickly copy their designs? First mover advantage typically isn't worth it. So, lets not pretend IP protection isn't necessary just because their are flaws with the current implementation of that protection.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
anothercanuck 8th Sep
@techconc Problems with your arguments:
When a company buys patents, how much did R&D cost?
When multiple patents from different companies patent the same thing, how is innovation promoted?
Small startups don't have $millions/$billions to defend their ideas, so how are startups to grow?
With the patent office handing out patents like a zealot hands out pamphlets on a street corner, how is IP or innovation protected?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
jhammackHTH 8th Sep
@techconc "
Unfortunately large companies seem to believe that they are entitled to retain their positions regardless of free market forces such as real innovation and competition. "

There is not a damn thing innovative about what Google did. They ripped off another company's code, and passed it off as their own by dumping it on the market. So spare. Google is a vile company that deserves whatever happens. They are 10 times worse than Microsoft ever was.
0 Votes
+ -
@toddybottom: Apple frequently licenses their patents.
Bruizer 8th Sep
@techconc

They are not obligated, however, to license all of their patents.
0 Votes
+ -
@cayble: You fundamentally do not understand IP.
Bruizer 8th Sep
"The problem is that for many years now in the high tech industry in particular, it appears that truckloads of patents have been given out that may have taken some hard wok to produce the specific "invention" but its roughly the same solution most people would have come up with if they were working on it."

The thing is, someone was the first to put the 10's of millions into coming up with that specific solution. So you think sponges (like Google) can simply wait and then copy it under the guise of "well... We would have done the same thing anyway"?
0 Votes
+ -
@anothercanuk: So you think there will be no more startups ever?
Bruizer 8th Sep
"Small startups don't have $millions/$billions to defend their ideas, so how are startups to grow?"

Or do you think Google is a "startup"? What about the very young Facebook? LinkedIn?
0 Votes
+ -
Entitlement? Can you read?
Tim Patterson 9th Sep
@techconc

First of all let's dispense with the industry invented term "intellectual property". There is no such thing. There is copyright and there are patents. Artificial monopolies should only be granted for truly groundbreaking innovations. Whether it cost some large inefficient company $20 billion to develop or cost a couple of ingenious people working in their garage their time.

Apple has a patent on a 'rectangular device with rounded corners'? Really? this is the corruption you support?

Your reply indicates that you are clueless as to the original intent of patents in this nation.

No one creates in a vacuum. Every "innovation" is simply building on what came before. We shouldn't be giving artificial exclusivity to what are really incremental improvements or even large improvements that others would come up with independently.

If you knew a little more history you would know that our current corrupt systems for patent and copyright are now almost the opposite of what the founders intended.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
techconc Updated - 9th Sep
@anothercanuck
"When a company buys patents, how much did R&D cost?"

So, what do you recommend, patents shouldn't be transferrable? If you develop something or legitimately pay someone else for their development effort, what's the difference? Companies contract other companies for development all the time. What's not fair is paying a very nominal fee for patents that are worth much more. This is what most suspect happened with HTC / Google, but in all fairness, we don't know for sure.

"When multiple patents from different companies patent the same thing, how is innovation promoted?"

That question doesn't even make sense. Prior art would be noted and the latter patents would be invalidated.

"Small startups don't have $millions/$billions to defend their ideas, so how are startups to grow?"

Then they shouldn't steal. They need to either develop in areas that are not heavily patented or license existing patents like everyone else. The startups that are both successful and useful are those that break new ground and do something different. How many more Android based smartphone companies do we really need?

"With the patent office handing out patents like a zealot hands out pamphlets on a street corner, how is IP or innovation protected?"

Again, your question doesn't make sense. Not granting patents would be not protecting innovation. Granting patents does protect those who have innovated.

@jhammackHTH:
I agree with your post... I believe your argument was directed to Tim Patterson.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
techconc Updated - 9th Sep
@Tim Patterson:

Tim, it's unfortunate that you're not able to discuss this issue without a heavy dose of insults. That's generally a sign of a losing argument.

Honestly, I'm not sure what your issue is with the term "Intellectual Property". You do at least agree that patents and copyrights should exist in some form and by definition, these are intellectual property. Likewise, the point you're trying to make is not effective.

You then try to make a case by picking on a seemingly weak patent from Apple involving rounded corners. Are you aware of the nature of design patents which covers ornamental design? Why must others copy this design? It's not necessary to build a similar product? Other products before Apple didn't incorporate this design, etc. The "obvious" method is to not round the corners, right?

"No one creates in a vacuum. Every "innovation" is simply building on what came before. "

I agree with this statement. The problem is, you take this basic truth to the point of making an illogical conclusion. By your "logic", since everything is built off of previous work, nothing is truly innovative in and of itself. You're wrong. Plain and simple.

Let's take the iPad for example. The broad concept of the tablet has existed before. As others note, this comes from science fiction. Apple had a concept in the 80's known as the Knowledge Navigator. They followed up with the Newton. Microsoft tried the tablet PC for 10 years, etc. Nothing was successful before the iPad. Did Apple invent the screen? No. Did Apple invent touch capacitance? No. etc, etc. Yet, lets wind the clock back a few years. Was the iPad obvious? If so, why did nobody else build it before Apple? I'm sorry, but there was a lot of innovation in coming up with the right form factor and overall user interface / user experience regardless of the fact that it was built on previous innovations. If Apple stepped on the patents of others along the way, they are not exempt from dealing with those issues just because they added new innovation.

Finally, as I've mentioned countless times in this thread, I fully agree that the patent system in it's current form is broken. I agree that far to many things are deemed patentable. That said, I do firmly believe that patents should exist to protect those who invested in innovation. If you have an issue with that position, then I invite you to make your case using logic rather than insults.
0 Votes
+ -
Not exactly
Tim Patterson 9th Sep
@techconc

I had my archos tablet before the first iPad hit store shelves. It's not so much that the iPad was a huge innovation. It became popular because of Apple's effective marketing and the fact that they have their own cult following who race to the store to be the first to buy the latest iToy.

Apple didn't have the first tablet nor the best in my opinion. Their success in the market has come largely due to marketing and creating the ridiculous perception that owning iCrap makes one "cool".
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
techconc 9th Sep
@Tim Patterson:

Ahh yes, the old "Apple is only successful because of their marketing... blah, blah, selling to cult following, etc. " argument. Yup, that must be it. That's the only explanation which allows us to cling to irrational positions.

Honestly, if you truly believe the only difference between an Archos tablet and an iPad is marketing, then there is nothing further for us to discuss. You clearly have a very strong anti-Apple bias which prevents you from acknowledging that they just might have a better product not to mention the fact that several hundred million users sort of goes beyond what would be considered a cult, etc. *sigh*....
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 9th Sep
@Tim Patterson

I had my archos tablet before the first iPad hit store shelves. It's not so much that the iPad was a huge innovation. It became popular because of Apple's effective marketing and the fact that they have their own cult following who race to the store to be the first to buy the latest iToy.

This whole "cult" mentality crap may have been true at one time but it's proven time and time again that Apple products do indeed live up to their hype. Great marketing is only good for a "first sale" but for a product to continuously sell version after version - especially with each version outselling the last like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad lines have done - a company HAS TO consistently produce a great product. In this case your whole "cult marketing" argument is pure steaming bullsh1t... and I say that not only as an iOS proponent but as someone who has seen Apple sell MILLIONS of these devices. Millions which would not have sold if they were crap.

Apple didn't have the first tablet nor the best in my opinion. Their success in the market has come largely due to marketing and creating the ridiculous perception that owning iCrap makes one "cool".

Repeating your point with different words does not make it any more true... just because YOU hate Apple and iProducts does not make them crap. Just as the perception that it is "cool" does not make a product crap.
0 Votes
+ -
What do you know of HTC?
johnmckay 9th Sep
@techconc

How can you say HTC don't innovate? And how an you get a patent on a new toy when Apple blatantly patent a chocolate bar image and label it a tablet format.

And if Google have the patents then nobody else has the right to claim anything over another company. This is the first piece of common sense I've seen in a long time. Go Google, go HTC, get right into them!!!!!!

You sound like another blinkered whingeing fanbois to me. I have HTC kit, the wildfire does three days on a batttery charge. No point in patenting that when the iphone only manages 1 day. I have samsung, and I have some Apple via work.

You say Apple innovate but they only innovate off the back of others. Its called evolution. At least nobody else is trying to coerce you into a closed system of "Apple World". All the zealots talk of Apple cameras, Apple TV, Apple everything. Others have it all without being tied to itunes. WHS / NAS, media players around the house, download films from the internet, rip your own to your own kit. It doesn't need Apple kit to deliver this, but Apple lock you into theirs if you start n that track. Thats NOT innovation in my book. Thats totalitarianism.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
techconc 9th Sep
@GetReal-mac.com
"How can you say HTC don't innovate? "

Yes, all players have made some small innovations along the way. But, honestly, can you name one thing that HTC has done which changed the industry to the point where everyone is trying to copy HTC? No? I didn't think so. Sorry, putting a different skin on a stock Android build isn't exactly newsworthy.

"Go Google, go HTC, get right into them!!!!!!

You sound like another blinkered whingeing fanbois to me."

LOL! Yeah, read your last sentence again, then tell me who the "fanbois" is... Really, that was funny. wink

"I have HTC kit, the wildfire does three days on a batttery charge. No point in patenting that when the iphone only manages 1 day."

Android phones generally don't compete well on actual battery life as compared to the iPhone. The wildfire is no different. Nice try though.

http://www.htcforums.com/wildfire/6211-wildfire-battery-life-issues.html

"At least nobody else is trying to coerce you into a closed system of "Apple World". All the zealots talk of Apple cameras, Apple TV, Apple everything. Others have it all without being tied to itunes."

Really? I was under the impression that people had free will and were free to choose the devices and ecosystems that suits them best. No? I honestly don't care which system you prefer. I just wish that people like you would actually stick to the facts and refrain from insults. You see, when you throw out terms like "fanbois" and "zealots" for people who simply don't share your opinion, that doesn't speak well for you. Really, let the facts speak for themselves.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
global.philosopher 8th Sep
@Tim Patterson
I hate frivolous patents but I equally hate lazy copycats.

The patent system needs to be amended to ensure only legitimate patents can be registered. At the moment patents are almost rubber stamped and assume the legal system will sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Patents are an important part of business (and remember have limited life). Patents protect innovation by allowing a company to recoup the cost of developing them. I have no issue with a company protecting legitimate patents.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
global.philosopher 8th Sep
@Tim Patterson
Patents are a double-edged sword. Legitimate patnets both encourage innovation as well as supress it. Trivial patents only supress it.
I think what is needed is for the patent laws to change so that only innovations/inventions that have a legitimate and tangible cost to development can be patented. Innovations and inventions that have no tangible cost should not be allowed to be patented. The reason is that a patenet is really defined as a fixed amount of time for a company to recoup costs as well as make a bit of profit. Any patent that had no cost to development has no costs to recoup and should not be allowed to be patented. This should clear up much of the frivolous patents and leave the courts to sort out the others.
This would be at least a good step in the right direction.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
ElJo 8th Sep
@Tim Patterson

Agreed. It's time for Google to open source their search technology.
0 Votes
+ -
Missing the point
Tim Patterson 9th Sep
@ElJo

While I happen to use and like 'open source' software I believe fundamentally in freedom. Companies or individuals have the freedom to license their bits any way they see fit.

What I have a problem with is the current corrupt system of granting artificial exclusivity.
0 Votes
+ -
What has Google innovated?
Bruizer 8th Sep
@Tim Patterson

A card catalog? It is plain why Apple needed to buy the Nortel patents; to keep them away from the Intelectual Ventures and Lodsys... I mean Google and HTC.
0 Votes
+ -
great move
The Linux Geek 8th Sep
Google should start making preemptive strikes against the axis of evil software: M$, Apple and Oracle.
This way the innovation will continue.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
x I'm tc 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek
They'd have to invent something first.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek What innovation? Search engines? There were several search engines around prior to Google. Buzz? Please. Google+? Copy of Facebook. Android? Purchased by Google who turned it from a carbon copy of the Blackberry OS to a carbon copy of the iPhone OS after the release and huge success of the original iPhone 2G.

So what is this innovation from Google you speak of?
0 Votes
+ -
Now hold on a second, you aren't being fair
toddybottom 8th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens
"Search engines? There were several search engines around prior to Google. Buzz? Please. Google+? Copy of Facebook. "

There were MP3 players before the iPod. There were touchscreen smartphones before the iPhone. There were laptops before the unibody MacBook.

I think Google has done a lot to take existing ideas and refine them. Web based email was terrible before GMail. Google+ is an improvement on Facebook in several ways (I really like circles, much more intuitive than the way Facebook works). Even search takes a page from Apple's approach where Google's search home page eliminated all the crud that cluttered (and continues to clutter) every other search engine home page. Google Apps is pulling both Apple and MS screaming and kicking into the cloud.

If we were to apply the same criteria to Google for the things we give Apple credit for "innovating" then Google is an incredibly innovative company.
0 Votes
+ -
And lest we forget Wave
toddybottom 8th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens
Google completely threw out everything we thought about Internet communication and started from scratch. What they came up with was incredibly innovative.

True, Wave did not succeed but I truly believe that this is because Wave was ahead of its time. The infrastructure is not quite ready for it. The failure of Wave was very sad and I hope it will be resurrected sooner rather than later.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 8th Sep
@toddybottom I don't entirely disagree with you - Apple has come up with some decent things on their own but at the same time some of their best "innovations" have come from refining different concepts, combining them, and making an excellent product. Let's take the iPhone - sure Apple did not invent the touchscreen smartphone... they did refine that idea into the first capacitive multi touch smartphone and that in turn helped to invigorate a very stagnant smartphone market.

While I do agree with you on Gmail I'm not sold on Google+ at all... I think it has potential but my personal preference is Facebook. Perhaps when it becomes more widely adopted and the bulk of my FB friends make the transition then I'll more than likely be sold on it... but since I use FB to keep up with far flung friends G+ is for now an interesting toy to play with on occasion.

I got a bit irritated over the resident Linux/ Google shill who supposedly left ZDNet never to return.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
partman1969@... 9th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens
Easy to make The Linux Geek look the fool they are. Gotta love it.
0 Votes
+ -
No it wont.
Cayble 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
ElJo 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek

And open source their search technology.
0 Votes
+ -
So Google is the new Intelectual Ventures and HTC the new Lodsys.
Bruizer 8th Sep
@The Linux Geek

Now we know why Apple bought the Nortel patents. For defensive protection against the lazy and thieving Google.

Without Apple to do all of Google's R&D, innovation would simply stop dead.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Peter Perry 8th Sep
Are you Angry because these guys are fighting back? I mean seriously, it is okay for Apple to defend their IP but not Google or HTC right?
0 Votes
+ -
ZDNet should have a lot of explaining to do
toddybottom 8th Sep
@Peter Perry
I don't understand how ZDNet can justify still painting Apple as the "small guy", the "victim" while bullies like HTC use the court system to pummel Apple for its lunch money.

Apple is the largest company in the world with ~$80,000,000,000 in cash. Apple is not the victim. Apple is not the small guy. I'm not saying they are a bully either. They just are a corporation. Just like HTC. Just like MS. None of them are any different.
0 Votes
+ -
Staff
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Larry Dignan 8th Sep
@toddybottom I'm not painting anybody as the little guy. I just find it odd that you can hold a patent for 10 minutes and start suing. Granted it's just playing defense---HTC has to do something---but still this patent thing is absolutely crazy. As noted, hopefully there's a detente once Google gets all its ammo together. Big patent bazookas aimed at each other.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
x I'm tc 8th Sep
@Larry Dignan

I have no idea, myself, but the read from "the experts" is that Google doesn't have much to defend itself with (that is, no "ammo" to get together) and Motorola adds little to the equation. 17,000 useless patents aren't going to help much, and the good ones are apparently long gone.

Thus, Android may be in quite a bit of trouble. However, Google has the assets to buy their way out, and eventually this whole thing will settle down.

This whole kerfuffle will likely ding the Android "ecosystem" up pretty badly, but it wont be the death-knell or anything. Consumers will probably hardly notice.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
partman1969@... 9th Sep
@toddybottom
Your jealous rant just made Apple look smarter. Seriously think of spouting their value and compare it to the what 9 to 10% of the actual pc market share. Oh and by the way I'll stick with Hotmail. Thank ya.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 8th Sep
@Peter Perry I would be okay with fighting back if HTC actually owned/bought the patents... from my understanding the patents still belong to Google which were formerly owned by Motorola Mobility. And to me this is a signal that Google is scared that HTC will lose the lawsuit. Does this mean Google will also "rent" patents to Samsung in it's defense against Apple's suit?

Personally I do not like that ANY of the lawsuits had even gotten started - the are not going to serve the customer, they are not going to help innovation, all they are going to do is to drive one of the companies down and line the pockets of some slimeball lawyer.
0 Votes
+ -
So?
toddybottom 8th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens
"And to me this is a signal that Google is scared that HTC will lose the lawsuit."

Google SHOULD be scared that HTC will lose the lawsuit. If HTC loses the lawsuit, Android becomes a less attractive OS for OEMs.

This is quite frankly no different than Apple stepping in when Lodsys started suing iOS developers. Apple was afraid that those developers were going to lose their lawsuits making iOS a less attractive OS for developers.

Apple did the right thing stepping in to help Lodsys.

Google is doing the right thing stepping in to help HTC.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 8th Sep
@toddybottom This is quite frankly no different than Apple stepping in when Lodsys started suing iOS developers.

This is actually quite a bit different than the Apple/ Lodsys issue. For one thing the license Apple got from Lodsys covered the devs working on iOS apps using those particular patents - Lodsys was being a patent troll and trying to get money from the devs using scare tactics... hell they didn't even bother to say who they were originally.

If HTC loses the lawsuit, Android becomes a less attractive OS for OEMs.

To echo your response to me: So? Google is in a position now to become an OEM and sell Android devices without having to use anyone else. The other manufacturers only have 3 choices in utilizing an OS for their devices: Android, WP7, or creating their own. And even if HTC did lose the lawsuit Android would still be an attractive OS compared to WP7 as far as a "ready made" OS (due to brand recognition and popularity) and more cost effective than creating their own from scratch.
0 Votes
+ -
No different at all
toddybottom 8th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens
" For one thing the license Apple got from Lodsys covered the devs working on iOS apps using those particular patents"

That is Apple's claim and they are free to test it in court. It will then be up to a court to decide if Apple is right or wrong. In both cases we have an interested platform provider stepping in on behalf of a 3rd party that the platform provider believes is innocent. Absolutely no difference. Some would call Apple a patent troll. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

I see absolutely no difference between Lodsys and Apple. In both cases you have corporations that are trying to maximize their revenues using patents as a weapon.

"To echo your response to me: So?"

I can tell you that your analysis is incorrect based on the fact that Google isn't standing by hoping that HTC loses. The mere fact that Google is stepping in suggests that no, Google does not want to lose their 3rd party OEMs.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 9th Sep
@toddybottom

I see absolutely no difference between Lodsys and Apple. In both cases you have corporations that are trying to maximize their revenues using patents as a weapon.

In Apple's case they really do not need to use patents as weapons - they are right now the largest tech company in the world. Is Apple right that HTC is using their patented tech? I can't say for sure - no one here can. in your own words: "That is Apple's claim and they are free to test it in court."

I can tell you that your analysis is incorrect based on the fact that Google isn't standing by hoping that HTC loses. The mere fact that Google is stepping in suggests that no, Google does not want to lose their 3rd party OEMs.

Why would Google "hope" that HTC loses? I never said nor even implied that. I'm saying that IMHO even if HTC loses Android will not be dealt as serious a blow as you seem to believe. I'm saying that Google is in a position to be it's own OEM - which could have some tremendous benefits for the Android platform as a whole.

I find this whole "rent a patent" crap to be just that - crap. Where will this end? Surely Google will not be the only one to rent out patents - what would stop Microsoft from renting out patents to another company to stop one of their competitors? What would stop Apple from doing the same? The rent a patent idea is going to set a bad precedent that can only make things worse IMHO.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
scottwsx96 9th Sep
@Pete "athynz" Athens

So it's okay for Apple to sue these companies with patents acquired from Nortel, but it's not okay for HTC to sue Apple with patents it acquired from Google?

A lot of double-standards are playing out in these comments and the Apple zealotry is rearing its ugly head once again.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
Pete "athynz" Athens 9th Sep
@scottwsx96

So it's okay for Apple to sue these companies with patents acquired from Nortel, but it's not okay for HTC to sue Apple with patents it acquired from Google?

I didn't say that - read my posts and try to comprehend. IF HTC actually had purchased and they actually OWN these patents then by all means let HTC use them to fight Apple. My issue is that Google still owns these patents and is simply - for lack of a better term - renting these patents to HTC to use. This - as I said before - could set a very dangerous precedent and make this whole patent pissing match even worse.

A lot of double-standards are playing out in these comments and the Apple zealotry is rearing its ugly head once again.

Are you accusing me of being an Apple zealot? LOL now THAT right there is funny! I am an iOS proponent but by no means am I some sort of mactard kneeling at the apple shaped altar... in fact the ONLY Apple product I own is my iPhone. I'm typing this on my HP Pavilion laptop running Windows 7 and I own a rooted Nook Color running Android 2.3 Gingerbread - I use whatever tech works for me and screw the religious cultish crap. So no, no zealotry here nor any double standards.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
GeorgeTillman Updated - 8th Sep
I just got a $829.99 iPad2 for only $103.37 and my mom got a $1499.99 HDTV for only $251.92, they are both coming with USPS tomorrow. I would be an idiot to ever pay full retail prices at places like Walmart or Bestbuy. I sold a 37" HDTV to my boss for $600 that I only paid $78.24 for. I use http://bit.ly/grab1024
0 Votes
+ -
RE: HTC sues Apple via Google: Here come rent-a-patent lawsuits
decryobliviots 11th Sep
1. There should have never been a single patent issued for software. Ever. This applies to all processes, as well. At best, software is entitled to copyright protection; processes are deserving of no IP protection whatsoever - they are called trade secrets.

2. 'Look and feel' issues with regard to patents are BS, plain and simple.

3. Patents should give the original inventor(s) protection for no more than 10 years...and only if there is an actual device in use employing the patent. If a company can't recoup any investment in the lease of a patent in 10 years, it wasn't worth the trouble in the first place. If it is only a 'concept' patent (these were never allowed when the patent process was instituted), the patent should be limited to 5 years, with extended protection to 10 years if a device utilizing the patent goes into production...use it or lose it.

4. There should be no 'secret' devices covered by a patent.

5. No entity, corporate or otherwise, should be allowed to purchase a patent. Patents should belong only to the real person or persons who invented the device. They can have a pre-discovery agreement under which employers can exclusively lease patent rights, but the lessee should not have the right to resell or re-lease these rights to third parties.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix