Hacker News Reader

Comment by huggyface | Hacker News Reader

the whole FRAND thing

Why would I hate Google for that? Motorola was cooperative and competitive with partners and despite all of their innovation they ended up -- like most of their traditional smartphone partners -- with most of their creations ending up in standards. Getting attacked by Apple and Microsoft they try to force a settlement with what they have. there is nothing in that that makes me dislike Motorola cum Google.

it was said more than once there—hate the game, not the player.

The xbox may be blocked because of critical, foundational patents, but I'm supposed to feel bad about the parties because they tried to be cooperative about them. The Galaxy Nexus is blocked because of laughable patents.

There is no question who the worse party is in this, and it's only a matter of time before something sticks and the iPhone/iPad is blocked from importation. We'll see how people like the game then.

View on HN

Why would I hate Google for that? Motorola was cooperative and competitive with partners and despite all of their innovation they ended up -- like most of their traditional smartphone partners -- with most of their creations ending up in standards. Getting attacked by Apple and Microsoft they try to force a settlement with what they have. there is nothing in that that makes me dislike Motorola cum Google.

Actually, what really did Motorola in was years of getting ripped-off both in design and carrier sales wins by Samsung. Have a good look at the product line that Motorola sold from about 2000-2005. Then look at what Samsung was selling during the same period.

This is just what Samsung does. Good engineering, and let someone else do the design.

Apple's patents are "laughable" and Motorola's are "critical" and "foundational" because you're a software person, not a hardware person. You'll find that a lot of hardware patents, including Motorola's, suffer from the same obviousness when evaluated by EE's that Apple's do when evaluated by SE's.

This is laughable wrong. Motorola has never been cooperative with Microsoft. They are the ones being the aggressor and have used FRAND patents to do so. They've been nothing but underhanded at every opportunity.

And if Google/Motorola are so cooperative then why are the FTC/EU investigating them for anti-competitive behaviour ?

Being investigated and being found guilty are two separate things. Better wait for a conclusion on the process before further inferences.

Oh how astonishingly boring.

Microsoft sued Motorola after they couldn't extort them into making uncompetitive Windows Mobile devices. Motorola responded with standards-based patents and non-standards based patents, with the clear intention of trying to get a stalemate settlement. The "cooperative" part was that Motorola has thousands if not tens of thousands of patents that play a part in standards because they are a part of the whole moving things forward.

And if Google/Motorola are so cooperative then why are the FTC/EU investigating them for anti-competitive behaviour ?

Derpedeederp derp. The government investigates almost everything that any large multinational does. There are active investigations of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle....if it's a big company there's probably an investigation of it. Secondly that EXACTLY goes to my original point -- Motorola made the "mistake" of daring to be a good innovation citizen before some upstarts came along and started extorting and patent trolling for every hilariously trivial patent.

Very mature response.

1. Motorola is obligated to not use standards based patents against implementers of the standard. Under ANY circumstance. It undermines the entire foundation of the industry and without standards we all lose.

2. No government is investigating Microsoft or Apple for patent abuse. And it is ridiculous to assume that the government just investigates any multinational company.

You talked about: "And if Google/Motorola are so cooperative then why are the FTC/EU investigating them for anti-competitive behaviour ?"

But now the goal post moved to patent abuse investigations, keep in mind that monopoly investigations and patent law can be engaged by diff state institutions, depending on the most effective engagement method, so you may have patent law dispute in the courts in any country and monopoly investigations conducted by an European entity. So while at any given moment, not having one corporation under investigation or defendent status does not push the innocent/guilty pendulum anywhere when acessing any given case. Or is it an indication of antagonistical reversable jurisprudence. The case at hand comes to mind.

Also, any multinational company is under the scrutiny of any government or substitutive supra governamental entity with attributed powers to do so and that is the way it will stay. There is nothing ridiculous about it. It is a needed lawful check for international law and the required balance for the implementation and usage of the Uniform Commercial Code.

If we're going to talk about obligations... I seem to recall that Microsoft and Apple had made some promises with respect to the Nortel patents they bought (triggered by a DoJ investigation).

Of course, somehow the patent troll they set up:

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/05/rockstar/all/

doesn't have the same obligations, but that still leaves Microsoft's and Apple's hands clean, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com