Are Google's Patents Too Weak To Protect Android? 257
An anonymous reader writes "The Guardian published an opinion piece written by former-NoSoftwarePatents-activist-turned-controversial-patent-blogger Florian Mueller. He lists 12 patent lawsuits instigated against Android last year, says there are many more to come, and believes that Google's portfolio of only 576 US patents is dwarved by those of Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and others. So Google can't retaliate against aggressors such as Oracle. Consequently — he argues — Android makers will have to remove functionality or pay high license fees, and the operating system will become unprofitable for handset makers. Even the app ecosystem could suffer, he says. Since Google received only 282 new US patents in 2010, the gap between Google's portfolio and those of its competitors is widening further: Apple produces about twice as many, and Microsoft gets more than 3,000 new ones a year. Let's discuss this: is Android really in for so much trouble? Can't Google find other ways (than owning many patents) to defend it than countersuing? How about its vast financial resources?"
Well.. (Score:5, Informative)
It's not the number of patents, but the likelihood of a patent being actionable, and/or enforcible.
In any case, if there is a court judgement that sufficiently harms innovation because of the escalating war in software patents, you will be sure that there will be a change in the direction in jurisprudence with regards to these "soft" patents. You have to remember that most of hte world don't have software patents, and many places (like Europe) would like to keep it that way.
Re:Question about summary (Score:2, Informative)
He's now working for Microsoft using his old reputation as an anti-swpat campaigner to lobby for patents in open standards, and to attack Google with pieces like this. Florian Mueller is a whore, has always been, and everything he writes should be taken with a pound of salt.
Re:Question about summary (Score:2, Informative)
No, he has reconsidered his stance and considers the abolition of software patents futile. That does not, however, mean he is not anti-software patents, just that he doesn't think pushing for software patents to be abolished is going to do any good.
Re:We are in the midst of software patent armagedd (Score:4, Informative)
If you're going to go on that old exception about algorithms and "all software is math," then that argument has lost many times and is unlikely to ever succeed.
It succeeded in part in In re Abele. It also succeeded in cases focused more on formalistic hoops, like In re Warmerdam or In re Lowry, and we never did find out whether Beauregard claims would pass judicial muster. SCOTUS avoided the question in Bilski v. Kappos, and AFAIK, has yet to address the question directly.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, but it's a fair question to ask. Personally I regard Google's legal team as very sharp, and unlike many other companies they are quite happy going for the throat with patent invalidation rather than seeking detent. And the trolls know it.