∞ The motivation behind lawsuits against Android

Ben Bajarin:

That being said what I feel the real issue behind the lawsuits is that Android is free. It’s obviously one thing to infringe on a companies inventions or innovations and then sell them but its another entirely to infringe on someones inventions and innovations and give them away for free. It sends the message that those innovations aren’t even worth enough to ask someone to pay for them.

[ad#Google Adsense 300x250 in story]I know Ben and he is a really smart guy, but I’m not sure I agree with him on this one. I think Google’s sole intention in releasing Android for free was market share, and it worked. They are a huge player in the market and have many of the biggest names in the business using Android. Success.

I also think the patent lawsuits against Android are done, in part, for the same reason. Apple doesn’t care that Android is free, they care that Android is using its patented technology to gain control of the market.

In fact its hard to create a product in today’s times that doesn’t infringe on someones patents.

Sad, but true.

Anonymous

The most depressing bits of tech news recently have been stories of Lodsys and others going after individual application developers. Small developers (who often create great applications) are finding it too expensive to defend themselves legally, and this is creating an atmosphere where they are considering just not developing apps. I don’t know how widespread this is, the news I’ve read feels anecdotal and might be limited to just a few independent developers. I wouldn’t want a marketplace ruled only by big companies making apps; that reduces pressure to keep prices low and to innovate.

I would image this issue will have a deleterious effect on both the iOS and Android developer communities.
http://twitter.com/JustSomeHuman Phil Ershler

I am not an attorney (much less a patent attorney) so take this with a big grain of salt. But, as I understand things, if Apple really owns the patents in question, if they don’t take action to protect them, the patent can ultimately be lost. However this completely skirts the question of how screwed up the patent process is in the U.S. That’s a long discussion for some other day.

Anonymous

I do think the original article was trying to focus on Google’s “We don’t really care” attitude. I can believe that many at Google feel if something is out in the public, then it is legitimately up for grabs. No difference between in the public and in the pubic domain.

Joe
His Shadow

This concurs with what I have read, and sadly, this is a case of “hate the game, not the player”. Apple has (and this is a point the Apple bashers are seemingly incapable of understanding/remembering) been here before. They watched as the entire computer industry adopted hardware and software elements Apple championed, and when they did begin the process of protecting their IP, they discovered they had sold the farm in their poorly worded licensing deals.

Apple will simply not let this happen again. I know it’s hard for many to retain some historical perspective, but companies have been suing each other since companies and lawsuits were invented. The histrionics from Android fans and general Apple bashers is that Apple has somehow invented the lawsuit and is the only one fully engaged in defending their IP. Even a cursory glance of the state of legal affairs between tech companies shows quite handily this simply isn’t true.

They must have forgotten when Microsoft sued every one with “micro”, “soft” or “windows” in the name of their product, or the spectacle of a car company suing a model.

Anonymous

I just commented on the OP’s post, but while I agree with you from the complainants POV, I do see his point from Google’s POV. Google has a history of this kind of approach (sort of a variation on “Ask ‘forgiveness’, not permission” or maybe “Shoot everything and let God sort them out”) if you consider their book project and their recent music service. I’m sure there are others. I also consider companies that earn their revenue from advertising are more prone to this kind of approach. Their customers are not the end users.

Joe
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HRNMG5CQOSXWSHPBC2J2VCLTS4 JLB

“In fact its hard to create a product in today’s times that doesn’t infringe on someones patents.”
I’m sorry – just the opposite true.

Canon does not routinely steal Nikon’s ideas, they have plenty of their own to pursue.
The difference is that Canon has scruples, Google does not.

What Google did was do a tear-down-and-copy job on an iPhone back in ’07.
In other words, instead of doing something original Google *deliberately chose* to do it the easy way by stealing Apple’s ideas (and patents) to produce ‘Android’.

Ironically an android is an shallow imitation of an existing entity – human.
Google’s effort is just a copy of the real thing, that’s why their satisfaction rating is 20 points below iOS.