The Latest Patent Suit Against Google

from the just-noticed,-huh? dept

One thing you can be sure of in the technology world today is that if you're even remotely successful, someone somewhere will attack you for patent infringement. Google has certainly been on the receiving end of more than its fair share of such cases, and the latest one seems particularly bizarre. Based on patents held by a computer science professor at Northeastern University, Kenneth Baclawski, the lawsuit claims that Google has been violating the patent pretty much for its entire existence. Northeastern owns the rights to the patents and is a part of the lawsuit with a company named Jarg, who has licensed the patents from the University. Baclawski claims to have 10 patents, which you can find here. The one that seems likely to be at the center of this lawsuit is on a distributed computer database system and method.

What's odd, of course, is the fact that the lawsuit is just occurring now, so many years after Google has been widely known. The story that is being spun is that Baclawski and the president of Jarg, Michael Belanger, had no idea that Google might be infringing until an unnamed Boston patent attorney contacted them and pointed it out (after hearing a presentation on how Google works) in 2005. Of course, that was still quite a while ago, and the company explains that away by saying that they didn't want to pay a lawyer upfront and it took all this time to find one who would sue (in Marshall, Texas, of course) on contingency. However, as one patent attorney notes: "I find it equally unbelievable that it took them 2.5 years to find a contingency lawyer to take the case. Unless the patent is really crappy...." Indeed, with the number of patent lawsuits being filed these days on contingency (many of which would appear much weaker than this one), it seems hard to believe it would take so long.

Either way, this is yet another perfectly good example of how the patent system is not supposed to work. No one is accusing Google of somehow "stealing" this idea by seeing the patent and building it themselves. No one even seems to be saying that this is central to the company's success (the fact that the inventor himself didn't even think Google was infringing until after a patent attorney pointed it out is pretty telling here). Yet, now Google is being sued for supposedly infringing. In other words, this is clearly a case where even if there is infringement (and that may be questioned) it's quite clear that Google developed their own version independently, and Google's success has nothing to do with Jarg or Baclawski. While independent invention is (for reasons that still don't make any sense) not a valid defense to infringement claims, it still seems ridiculous to think that Google caused any kind of "damages" to this other firm (or Northeastern) at all. The patent system is supposed to spur innovation. Google clearly did innovate and did so in a big way totally independent of this patent. To then punish the company goes against the very principles of the patent system.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: kenneth baclawski, northeastern, patents
Companies: google


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Le Blue Dude, 12 Nov 2007 @ 11:42am

    Burn down the patent office and destroy their file

    Well, at least that should help. They'd have to refile them all. Under new laws, hopefuly. Do you know how many patents there are for systems to throw out bad patents?

    There's apparently a reason the gov isn't doing it!

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I like Mike, 12 Nov 2007 @ 11:52am

    "While independent invention is (for reasons that still don't make any sense) not a valid defense to infringement claims..."

    Tell that to Apple when they sued M$ for infringement on Apple's GUI. M$'s defense was that while it had the same 'look & feel' they independently developed their own GUI. Seems to me these guys will be hard pressed to prove Google 'stole' their patent. But then again, since the patent office lets you file an idea for an invention Google may just have to pay these guys to go away.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike (profile), 12 Nov 2007 @ 12:28pm

      Re:

      Tell that to Apple when they sued M$ for infringement on Apple's GUI. M$'s defense was that while it had the same 'look & feel' they independently developed their own GUI.

      That was a copyright suit, not a patent suit, where the defenses are quite different...

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Kevin, 12 Nov 2007 @ 12:04pm

    Look and feel

    But if I recall correctly, Apple did not win their case.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I like Mike, 12 Nov 2007 @ 12:35pm

    Thanks

    Thanks for the heads up on Apple vs M$. Maybe Apple would have more luck on the patent front.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • Decisions, decisions.

    So now Google is confronted with the same question every deep pocket company is faced with when sued. Is it cheaper to settle now or do we want to defend our rights to the end regardless of the cost?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    teknosapien, 12 Nov 2007 @ 6:00pm

    funny

    The diagrams look a lot like the architecture of an OpenVMS system, maybe a ported idea at best?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Avatar28, 12 Nov 2007 @ 6:25pm

    Apple vs MS was settled anyways

    The case never made it to judgement anyways. It ended up being settled (in Microsoft's favor) via a patent that Apple had apparently already licensed to MS.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Alfred E. Neuman, 12 Nov 2007 @ 6:36pm

    Just curious ...
    How does east texas come up with a jury of peers for such cases ?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    T, 13 Nov 2007 @ 9:11am

    The plaintiffs are using the legal system as a lottery.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.