Google Acquires 222 More IBM Patents 73
itwbennett writes "The newly acquired patents include email management, server backup, tuning and recovery, e-commerce, advertising, mobile web page display, instant messaging, online calendaring, and database tuning. Google hasn't said why they wanted the patents, but it's a good bet they had fighting lawsuits in mind."
'tis sad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why did IBM give them up? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google is offering money. I bet IBM retain a perpetual licence for their own use, so they haven't lost the use of the patents. IBM probably didn't expect to use the patents - they were just part of their armoury. Google needs that armoury more, and is willing to pay for it. Like one army selling weaponry surplus to its needs to another. IBM would probably like the counter-patents broken: as a services company nowadays, IBM has less to gain from patent monopolisation than it used to.
Re:Why not license them instead? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google wants the patents to fight Apple. So they offer to buy the patents (and probably licence them cheap/free back to IBM).
Net result: IBM keeps doing what they're doing but Google gives them a pile of money.
If IBM says "no" Google will go buy someone else's patents, and IBM basically just left money on the table.
Software patents stymie more than helps... (Score:5, Insightful)
We need to double our efforts to eliminate software patents. These patents are preventing us from reaching our full potential. I remember the good old days when we developed software for fun and profit and took inspiration from other programs and added one more innovative feature to them.
Now we have patents for the most obvious bullshit out there. We need to stop this madness. Every time I see these patents I think back to my calendar program. It had a month and day view and allowed you to enter appointments and let you know if there was a scheduling conflict (this was a big deal in 1982/83). I didn't really plan on publishing it in a magazine but I had a dick of a friend who mailed an early version of my program to an Atari magazine in exchange for a 1200 baud modem. The only thing that consoled my anger towards the little turd was the fact that perhaps someone else was improving on it and possibly showing off their improvements to like minded enthusiasts. My family was poor so I really had no recourse. I did learn a valuable lesson of securing my diskettes.
Anyway despite the way the program entered the public domain, it was how things were done back then. Desktop computing was a very new concept and we gathered together at local computer users groups and showed off what we did and explained how we did it. We were basically learning from each other. I support the GPL since I think it preserves some of the philosophy we had back then. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree that all software should be free but I do think that if I share something with you and you add to it then you should share back. I also believe that software patents are counter productive and slowing our progress.
Now I don't think anybody could make a neat program without the risk of being sued by a patent troll or a corporation that wants to keep a monopoly position in their market segment. This shit has to stop. How do we really expect healthy innovation and competition to continue in the next decade with this escalating patent threat.
My rambling rant is over... sigh.
Re:Why did IBM give them up? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you show me a case where Google attempted patent trolling?
Re:Why did IBM give them up? (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't find nor remember any story about Google patent trolling. I had no idea that patents in our current system have anything to do with invention.
Tinfoil hat or good troll. Not sure which as they both post with such conviction.
Re:'tis sad... (Score:5, Insightful)