If Google Is Serious About Reforming Patent Mess, It Should Make A Bold Statement And Stop Using Motorola Patents To Demand Cash
from the now's-the-chance dept
We've discussed in the past the fact that Google has never used patents offensively. That is, while it has many patents, it has never (that anyone can point to) used them to threaten another company to force them to pay up. Instead, it has only used them defensively. Over the summer, Google got even more aggressive, speaking out about how patents had become a tax on innovation, rather than enabling innovation. In fact, we pointed out that Google actually seemed to be a perfect example of how innovative companies didn't need to be aggressive on patents -- a feeling that is pretty strong in the Valley.Of course, about a week later, Google bought Motorola Mobility, almost entirely for its large patent portfolio. Given Google's outspoken viewpoint on patents, the assumption was that the company would continue to use those patents defensively against the increasing number of attacks by patent holders on Google. However, as MG Siegler is reporting, it looks like Google might at least continue Motorola's patent strategy post acquisition (which is about to be approved):
Of course, with some of these, the lawsuits are well underway, but Google could seek to dismiss some of the lawsuits if it wanted to. I think Siegler goes a bit far in claiming that Google automatically becomes "the villain" for gaining control over offensive patent moves that it's inheriting with this purchase. The bigger question will be what Google does going forward. However, if Google really does want to send a larger message around patents, it will get itself out of those efforts pretty quickly once taking over the company, reinforcing that the larger picture is more important than being able to extract a tax on competing products.Google is saying that they don’t plan on making any changes to the way Motorola was enforcing their patent pool. This presumably means, among other things, they’ll now be suing Apple and trying to block the iPhone from being sold in certain countries.
This also presumably means they’ll be suing Microsoft and trying to bring down the H.264 video codec — which, by the way, Google created a competitor to (WebM) out of fear that someone would come along one day and try to enforce patents that would kill the H.264 video codec.
How’s that for a mind fuck?
The tables have gotten so turned that it’s now Apple and Microsoft who are complaining about patent enforcement. Specifically, both want assurances that patents licensed under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, are actually just that — fair.
In Motorola’s eyes, “fair” is Apple paying 2.25 percent on each iPhone and iPad sold. John Paczkowski of AllThingsD did the math: this would mean Apple paying about a billion dollars a year in royalty fees to Motorola.
A billion dollars. The mobile unit that Google is buying lost $285 million for the year last year. Apple would be indirectly keeping them, a competitor, afloat.
Of course, there is one other thing that makes this a bit more complicated, which I think Siegler ignores. He mentions how Google had to "make assurances that they would act fairly with patents they were acquiring." But he doesn't quite highlight the possible significance of that statement. If Google does get itself out of some of these lawsuits, and then chooses either to not enforce its patents against others or (better yet!) to freely license its patents to many other players, how long would it take Google's competitors to claim that Google was somehow "unfairly" using the patents to its advantage by giving them away for "free." Google competitors have used Google's free services as a stick against Google in the past, pretending that this meant they were abusing their position. I could definitely see some sneaky and ridiculous legal argument that if Google isn't making companies pay up for its newly acquired patents that it's unfairly abusing its position. This is, of course, a ridiculously stupid argument, but it's the nature of the world these days, where aggressive IP enforcement is seen as the norm.
Either way, I hope that Google stands by its words from last summer and is quick to extricate itself from offensive patent situations. But we'll find out soon.
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Offense is the new defense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Companies in googles situataion, have three optoins
1 : Do nothing, and leave themselfs open to an to attack
2 : Attack. Some companies, once something works i.e patent abuse, they'll keep doing it till they cant do it no more. These companies should'nt be allowed to do this, and sueing them back is, one way to get them to stop and think, otherwise they'll only take it as permission
3 : Total reform of the Patent system, back to protecting unique and inovated ideas and not a tool to abuse in order to sabotage the competition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Which is really the problem with calls for Google to not use Motorola's patents against anyone. It would be one thing to argue that they should not be used for a first strike, but that ship has sailed: The companies who are being sued by Motorola are also trying to sue Motorola. You can't unilaterally disarm yourself in the middle of a battle and expect not to get slaughtered.
And sometimes the only way to reform a broken system is to push so hard until it breaks so spectacularly that all parties have to agree it must be fixed. Get Apple and Microsoft beating the "end software patents" drum and software patents will end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I have mixed feelings about this. Apple is very aggressive with their patents, they deserve to be sued into oblivion (and they are messing with a device I own and like which is from the Galaxy series from Samsung) and that makes me mad. If I were Google I'd cause some major mayhem on the patent issue and pull out in the end just to make the others shit their pants and speak against the patent system. Sure it can backfire but it might speed up the changes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Please use a spell checker, read your comment before posting, and, correct syntax and grammar errors.
This might help us both continue with this Internet thing.
Regards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Completely disagree
Scorched Earth might not be too bad, Forest Fires are helpful to the soil and forests in a natural settings. Potentially this might help fix the entire patents issue here in the US (and also hopefully others would follow our direction...they have in copyright/patent maximization.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Completely disagree
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Say what you will, but an evil part of me wants Google (who are the good guys, and have been for long) to actually bash the bad guys (Apple "all your rights are belong to us" and Microsoft "embrace extend exterminate") and get some money out of this. It seems fair somehow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't believe Google is suddenly "evil" because it's standing up to the "bullies". Google is just fighting for the little guy again. I mean sure they could just sit on the patents to defend themselves, which is a great short term solution, but without serious demand the patent system will never be reformed. Yeah it takes time, but the sooner you start the sooner the changes are made... which means the sooner we start to see some real innovation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
uh, there's more to it than this
It has nothing to do with google and everything to do with FUD. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16960676 -
what is going on? Apple and Microsoft want to be able to sue for their patents regardless of licensing - google does not.
So their statement does not have to do with the shakedown, Mike. As noted by PJ on groklaw: "See what the issue is? Apple and Microsoft would like to *change* FRAND terms to include a waiver of injunctions, which isn't now part of FRAND requirements. In fact, it's an equitable remedy. They'd like it to be removed as a defensive move, in order to disarm Android vendors, especially now that Google is buying Motorola. In short, it's not so much about loving standards all of a sudden as wanting to win by disarming the other side. And then there is the problem that no one can build a smartphone without paying so much for patents they can't make a profit. This is now hitting Apple and Microsoft too. I wish Microsoft and Apple would be more straightforward. Their paid "consultants" too. I mean if someone is being paid by Microsoft, whose position is he or she likely to push? So, good for BBC News for seeking out lawyers to check on what non-lawyer consultants are pushing out there"
As noted - their concern is tablets and handsets - not codecs.
I agree that they should do more, but I wouldn't act like they've been passive - quite the opposite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you write a program more sophisticated than Hello World, you are infringing on literally dozens of patents owned by various mega corporations. Patents on such ingenious technology as displaying an animated placeholder while a background process downloads content. Wow, now that's genius! It's basically a patent on the spinning hourglass -- and one of the actual patents Microsoft is suing Barnes & Nobel for infringement. The actual reason Microsoft is suing Barnes & Nobel is because B&N had the audacity to use Android in their Nook e-book reader -- how dare they! Android is successful, Microsoft is in decline, and they want to sue those who are successful.
So how exactly do you propose any company NOT infringe on others' patents when the real problem is that the patent system is fundamentally broken in that it grants patents on obvious and trivial things?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Microsoft strategy - Tax you're OS competitor, so they are no longer the cheapest OS, for a given handset manufacturers
Apples strategy - Sue competitors for ridiculous patents in the hopes of getting their competitors products out the market
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I disagree, Sir.
So, then, I think Google should sue absolutely everyone. Sue phone makers, web browsers, search engines. Over the most vague and ridiculous patents it has. Google should turn into the biggest patent troll of all. In the short term it will obviously hider a lot of progress, as do all patent trolls. But I think that when some Congressmen see what their least favorite company (enemy of their **AA paymasters) is doing, maybe, MAYBE they will try to actually reform the patent code to stop Google.
I kind of do the same thing at work. Boss says "I am directly ordering you do only work on this project." I work on that project. And when I hit a roadblock and can't progress on it any more, I sit on the internet and do nothing. Sometimes the only way to point out the absurdity of the system is to follow it exactly to the letter and abuse it as hard as possible while still following all the rules. Then, hopefully the error is revealed and fixed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have mixed feelings here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does Google have any choice?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does Google have any choice?
Yes, Motorola held a slew of patents, many, many of which reflect forward thinking R&D activities pursued many years ago. With Google about to become, if the SEC tea leaves are being read correctly, an overseer of product manufacture, a major shift from its products to date, it may very well have little choice by to try and preserve and grow its market position for what I am convinced are some of the very best products on the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
quick - someone call the whaaaambulance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fight bullies with bullies
Those companies aren't going to react to a play nicey nicey bullshit you propose. Google's been playing by the rules and has partners that are suffering losses at the hands of MS and Apple b/c of their tyrades. It's time to fight fire with fire. Fire away, Google. It's work saying one more time: FUCK APPLE AND FUCK MICROSOFT - you opened the door on this one.
I'm obviously a Google fan man. FMSAFA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google and the Motorola patents
What happened to fairness, balance of power, etc.? Are these just meaningless terms when applied to Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Go google!
Apple and Microsoft started the mess, and Apple recently has taken it to a new obscene level to try and stop competition and now cying fowl because someone is finally fighting back.
Well done to Google (and Samsung) and keep it up, until someone finally sees the patent system for what it really is!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Go google!
Power corrupts, and Google is just another corporation, after all. It isn’t much of a stretch to think that those patents, initially acquired for purely defensive purposes, might gradually become just too tempting not to exploit as a source of revenue in their own right, particularly if the company were to make a few missteps and fall from its seemingly unassailable can-do-no-wrong position (as Microsoft has done).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Motorola independence from Google
And this discussion that 2.25% is not fair and reasonable because it would mean a billion dollars is a red herring. What are other common licensing fees associated with FRAND patents? Also, what kind of percentage of phone sales does Microsoft get from each Android vendor? This kind of information backed by a reputable source would provide valuable insight for readers about what is fair and reasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Motorola independence from Google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@32
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In Google's shoes I'd do the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
never again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]