Google hypocrisy: patenting payment splitting while lobbying reform

> We are literally being lobbied for patent reform and patent-trolled by Google at the same time.

Filing for a patent is not patent trolling. Patent trolling is using a patent (particularly one you are not practicing and/or one of dubious originality or dubious patentability for other reasons) to try to extract money from a competitor via suit or threat of suit. Merely filing a patent is not trolling.

While it might be reasonable to assume that a filing is for the intent of trolling when an the entity filing for the patent has a past history of trolling, as the article notes:

> Google has a relatively long history of not suing over patents

---

> but they are clearly playing the game they are also trying to change, and this is hypocritical.

No, its sensible. If you pretend the law is what you'd like it to be in a competitive environment, rather than what it actually is, you die before you get to make any changes.

If you want to make changes, it is prudent to make the case for the changes, while still acting in a prudent fashion to protect your interests given the existing rules. (If nothing else, this avoids creating an additional disincentive for your competitors to support rules changes, since if you are acting in a way which makes you weak under the existing rules, your competitors have an incentive to protect the existing regime in order to profit from your weakness.)

> but they are clearly playing the game they are also trying to change, and this is hypocritical.

No, it's practical. Playing by the rules of the game you're currently playing (rather than the rules of the one you wish you were playing) isn't incompatible with wanting to change the rules.