Google Finally Speaking Up About Problems With Patent System

from the good-for-them dept

Back when Google first put forth its stalking horse bid for Nortel's patents, the company explained its position by basically dancing around the issue of just how ridiculous patents had become. It made it clear that it was looking to buy the patents for defensive purposes, but couldn't bring itself to really condemn the problems of the patent system. Some patent system supporters have tried to claim that this was actually Google realizing the value of patents.

Of course, to many of us, it demonstrated the exact opposite. Google was demonstrating the ridiculousness of the patent system by showing that it was ready to pay billions not for the "innovation," but to avoid wasteful lawsuits. Of course, in the end, the patents went to a coalition of companies that didn't include Google, and it seems likely that we'll start seeing them in litigation pretty quickly. Even then Google was pretty quiet about its opinion on patents.

That seems to be changing. The company's General Counsel spoke with TechCrunch's MG Siegler and finally seemed willing to say what's widely known in Silicon Valley: that patents do the opposite of encouraging innovation and they represent a tremendous tax on innovation:
"A patent isn't innovation. It's the right to block someone else from innovating... Patents are government-granted monopolies... We have them to reward innovation, but that’s not happening here."
Nothing exactly earth shattering, but it's nice to see Google finally willing to come out and state the obvious, rather than holding back. Now, if only our elected officials would listen.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    maclizard (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 1:56pm

    if only...

    Hold on, are you implying that elected officials can in fact listen? I thought the only reason people got elected was to shut them up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    Mike42 (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 1:58pm

    Did you hear that?

    That's the sound of all the patent lawyers switching to Bing!


    AAAnnnd switching back after their first search returns garbage.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Donv69, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:00pm

    Remove the government

    Google should just remove all government websites from its index until the government listens.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Robert Doyle (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:10pm

    No more lawsuits

    I think if Google really wanted to make a point they could simply refuse to sue people for infringing on their patents.

    I'm not saying to stop filing them - credit where credit is due - but to truly take the high road and refuse to pursue people/companies in that manner.

    They should still talk about it and this community should still report on it, simply to highlight how much damage could be done.

    Plus, the hit to the legal community's pocket would be worth it.

    Or better yet, send only interns to court when they get sued. Show some true disdain for the ridiculousness of the whole thing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:14pm

    Re: Remove the government

    Bing copies some of Google's results from what I remember. So that would be a double whammy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:16pm

    Re: No more lawsuits

    Your last idea seems more in line with Google's sense of humor seeing as they decided to bet pi on those patents.

    I expect though that as much as they hate it, a good defence includes a good offense

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:16pm

    Re: No more lawsuits

    Your last idea seems more in line with Google's sense of humor seeing as they decided to bet pi on those patents.

    I expect though that as much as they hate it, a good defence includes a good offense

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:23pm

    Re: No more lawsuits

    ... and who is Google suing over patent infringement?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:25pm

    Re: No more lawsuits

    Or better yet, send only interns to court when they get sued. Show some true disdain for the ridiculousness of the whole thing.

    Showing disdain toward a judge is not the most economically effective way to show disdain for a law.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    Chris Rhodes (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:28pm

    Re: No more lawsuits

    I think if Google really wanted to make a point they could simply refuse to sue people for infringing on their patents.

    Such as who? Who should they "stop suing"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    wizened (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:28pm

    Sure government officials listen

    Government officials listen as soon as you put your money in the coin slot. The more money you insert the more attentively they listen.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    ken (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:34pm

    Our current patent system is destroying innovation, jobs, and billions of dollars. True creativity is being destroyed by endless litigation. Nothing is developed now that does not generate lawsuits from patent trolls.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:42pm

    Re: if only...

    ... elected officials can in fact listen?


    Every elected official always listen to anyone who makes a big enough campaign donation.

    You want access? Pay up. It's that simple.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    ken (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

    1 - 5 years max on patents

    Patents lasting for 20 years might as well be perpetual because any technology from 20 years ago is long obsolete. How many people are still using 20 year technology besides the music biz and their cd's?

    Patents should last no more than 1 - 5 years and they should be absolutely specific. If you aren't actively developing a patent you should lose it after one year and be subject to lawsuits for the damages done to those who would have used it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    Prashanth (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

    But what about Android (with reference to Microsoft)?

    That's cool that Google is doing this, but the fact that Microsoft is extorting Samsung over alleged patents covering Android technologies still sickens me; so when is Google actually going to stand up to Microsoft, Apple, et al regarding this patent extortion over Android?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:01pm

    Re: Re: No more lawsuits

    I think they mean that Google should be willing to license patented works of their own for a small fee and GPL licensing, instead of actually suing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:02pm

    Re: 1 - 5 years max on patents

    Correction: 12 months from submission to prototype, or you lose it. THEN, for a successful prototype, you get 2 years to get it to market.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:04pm

    Re: Did you hear that?

    or porn, bing returns lots of porn if you turn off safe search

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:06pm

    Re: Re: Re: No more lawsuits

    i think his point is they already dont sue anyone

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    Rick Martin, Patent Attorney (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:07pm

    Is Intellectual Ventures A Crook?

    Visit the public PAIRS system at USPTO and check patent application serial number 11/173,990 and the Third Party Submission 37 CFR 1.99 dated 9/18/2007.That was me. Nathan had filed 35 patents on a nine year old idea of offering free printed photos in exchange for printing ads on the photos. Sort of print "Alpo" on your tie, then Alpo pays for your printed photo for the privilege of keeping their name in your family photo album forever.How was it that IV could not find half a dozen killer references but little me did? Was Nathan trying to monopolize an entire advertising method with 35 fraudulently obtained patents? The USPTO Finally Rejected this case after six years.Big Money with Bad Patents are Bad for America. NPR should rewind their reporters to describe why these smelly tactics are not cause to tear down the patent system.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    HothMonster, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:09pm

    I dont know why we dont just keep reporting on the patent given to toast like 10 years ago (or the hundreds of other toast patents) until people realize how god damn stupid the whole system is. It was something like "process for thermally enriching bread," and I believe was a mention during the This American Life episode discussed earlier today.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    Mike42 (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:10pm

    Re: Re: Did you hear that?

    Note to self... :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Chris Rhodes (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:13pm

    Re: Re: Re: No more lawsuits

    Google already doesn't sue over patents, and they also have a habit of buying up patents and then giving people irrevocable rights to them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    icon
    Some Other Guy (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 3:54pm

    Re: Re: Did you hear that?

    Since that is the best advert for Bing I've ever heard, I feel I must accuse you of being a paid Microsoft blog-shill :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    James D (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 4:03pm

    This American Life - Patent edition

    This week's episode focuses on patent trolls and the famous IV:

    http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/26/this-american-life-tackles-patent-trolls-lives-to-broadcas t/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    icon
    Derek Kerton (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 4:31pm

    Fixed That

    "We have them to reward innovation, but that’s not happening here."

    We have them to *stimulate* innovation, but that, too, is not happening here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 6:10pm

    We’ve Heard This Before

    The lawyer who coined the term “patent troll” is now working for Intellectual Ventures (the world’s biggest-ever patent troll) as their chief counsel.

    Basically, small(er), growing companies quite rightly see patents as a nuisance and an obstacle to innovation. But once they become big and established, they begin to appreciate the point in using patents from the other side, to hold back new, up-and-coming competitors.

    Google’s attitude now is similar to Microsoft’s in the early 1990s: by many measures already a big company, but still with plenty of room for growth, so it still values hanging on to the startup mentality. Once it has reached the limits of its own growth opportunities, you will see its attitude predictably change.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 26th, 2011 @ 10:20pm

    Re: We’ve Heard This Before

    Not unless the culture at Google changes.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jul 26th, 2011 @ 10:41pm

    Re: Sure government officials listen

    So it's like a homemade sex toy then.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Prisoner 201, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 1:47am

    Re: Re: if only...

    Free market ad absurdum. Too bad it's actually happening.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Nicedoggy, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 3:30am

    Re: Re: Remove the government

    You have violated Judge Dredd copyrights and are here now sentenced to 20 years in prison, what do you plead?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 4:28am

    Re: 1 - 5 years max on patents

    How many people are still using 20 year technology besides the music biz and their cd's?

    The C language. The C++ language. FORTRAN. Unix. And many many more; these were just the ones I came up with in a few seconds.

    Just because you cannot recall any examples does not mean that they do not exist, nor that they are not important.

    Of course, these examples were never patented (and AFAIK software patents did not exist back then).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 6:52am

    Re: Re: 1 - 5 years max on patents

    OK, how many patented technologies are still current after 20 years.

    You may be prooving the point in that the languages you use are still in use precisely because they are not patented.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 7:21am

    Google is butt hurt because they didn't win, perhaps?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Vic Kley, Jul 27th, 2011 @ 6:34pm

    Moore's Warriors Not Innovation?

    Are you all only talking about minor variations of program structures and Software Patents? If so say so otherwise your ridiculous point appears to be the top of your heads. I would still disagree but there is a place for debate concerning pre-existing software inventions.

    The progress of smaller, faster, cheaper as applied to computing power and storage however is an area where the truly new invention is not open to debate. New solutions are necessary for fairly small markets (the actual methods and equipment for semiconductor manufacture) in which there must be protection or no investment will take place.

    Each year there are new obstacles to the progress of electronics which powers must of the innovation your readers use and anticipate. New obstacles to Moore's Law.

    Each year there are a few people, Moore's Warriors, who provide solutions which must be protected. Solutions work and Moore's Law marches forward, marches forward as it always has on the backs of myriad small but critical inventions.

    These inventions enable the products which in turn are perceived as "innovations" successful products.

    Google, Apple, GE, GM, Lenovo, Siemens, Toyota and IBM, all depend on inventions and a patent system of which they may be entirely unaware.

    Attack the patent system, and its inventors blindly and the inevitable result will be the companies who owe their success to Moore's Law may well defeat the inventors - Moore's Warriors.

    An act of suicide. Blind suicide that takes our country and our children's future down with it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    icon
    Gene Cavanaugh (profile), Jul 27th, 2011 @ 8:39pm

    Patent reform

    No one can seriously argue that the patent system as it exists is NOT doing serious harm to our economy (and the world as a whole). No one can argue that the US government selling out to big entertainment, et al, is not a serious concern.
    But it is almost the definition of "moronic" to be so extremist! First, someone says "patents as they exist are so bad we would likely be better off without the present system", which is definitely true. Then person two jumps up and says ANY kind of system is bad!MORONS!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    staff, Jul 28th, 2011 @ 7:38am

    rubbish

    "just how ridiculous patents had become"

    The patents of others are always "ridiculous" when you're a defendant. Take a look. Far more often large firms like Google are defendants rather than plaintiffs. It all depends as they say on whose ox is being gored as the old story goes.

    If infringers don't pay you to write this rubbish, they should.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    identicon
    patent litigation, Aug 1st, 2011 @ 7:45pm

    epic

    In the context of recent events, Walker's comments sound a lot like sour grapes over Google's epic mishandling of its Nortel patent bid.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    ddstark, Feb 28th, 2012 @ 10:09am

    Re: Is Intellectual Ventures A Crook? Rick Martin

    Rick Martin AKA Ralph Martin He is on probation for misusing client funds. Google 10PDJ124 before hiring this crook. Legal name Ralph Martin. Also went bankrupt and was kicked out of offices at 385 Main Street though he still promotes this address on website. Though he shows several people on website he is a one man band. He admitted in court that he abused his son and the court took away visitation. Read what the attorney rating agency says about him at http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/80502-co-ralph-martin-1264077.html.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This