Hacker News Reader

Comment by grellas | Hacker News Reader

By now the blogosphere, twitterverse, and even mainstream media is abuzz with the absurd decision that Yahoo has made to sue Facebook over ten software patents with the assertion that Facebook’s entire business is based on Yahoo’s patented inventions.

What is the potentially depressive effect on Facebook's IPO price come this May (or whenever) if it has a lawsuit hanging over it claiming that its entire business model is based on Yahoo's patented inventions and that it would face a ruinous liability should Yahoo prevail?

I suppose the timing could be coincidental but I doubt it. After all, the problem for Facebook can easily go away if it is just willing to be "reasonable" in resolving this quickly. Truly a new low in patent trolling.

View on HN

Why mess with a winning strategy, see this quote:

Google and Yahoo settled the '361 patent dispute in August 2004. Google disclosed the settlement in an SEC filing just before its initial public offering (IPO). The relevant excerpt from Google's SEC filing states:

    Overture will dismiss its patent lawsuit against us 
    and has granted us a fully-paid, perpetual license to
    the patent that was the subject of the lawsuit and several 
    related patent applications held by Overture. The parties 
    also mutually released any claims against each other 
    concerning the warrant dispute. In connection with the 
    settlement of these two disputes, we issued to Yahoo
    2,700,000 shares of Class A common stock.

From this article: http://www.techuser.net/gcoverup.html

Of course the case isn't as strong this time, but it is a period of time when a troll has more than the usual leverage on the victim.

> I suppose the timing could be coincidental but I doubt it.

I don't. FB is much more vulnerable now than after the IPO shares have been sold. (That probably translates to a bigger settlement.)

That's what grellas was saying — he doubts the timing is a coincidence.

Sorry, I was snarking: I don't doubt the timing at all. I also won't be surprised if other lawsuits materialize soon.

There's a lot of money in FB, and if they don't have good patent protection, then it's open season.

So if you don't doubt the timing is a coincidence, that would mean you think it is a coincidence?

No, it means there's no doubt. I in fact believe the opposite of what you wrote wrt it being a coincidence. And I don't doubt it.

Got it now?

I understand your intention. But you are using the word differently from most people understand it. If you are convinced that something is not true, most people would say that you doubt that thing a lot. I'm not trying to stir up an argument, just explain why people seem to be having problems with your statement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com