Google’s Motorola a convicted patent troll

A federal jury yesterday rendered a verdict that makes Google (Motorola) a convicted patent troll. It has been found to have breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing flowing from Motorola’s FRAND licensing pledges to standard-setting organizations. None of the companies typically described as trolls have actually been convicted of similarly unlawful conduct.


  • FOSS lost all credibility with me during the Oracle trial. He’s clearly anti-Google.

    • Walt French

      @J C Bland wrote, “FOSS lost all credibility…”

      In THIS case, he made early, clear and fearless claims about what was happening. And in the Oracle case, he made claims that the trial would hinge on copyrights rather than patents—and guess what? Despite PJ’s vociferous blasts against him at Groklaw, THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. Groklaw declared “war” over the notion that open-source wasn’t carte blanche to do whatever Google wanted, and crossed the line from being a very helpful anti-troll resource as they were in the SCO fiasco, into part of the propaganda campaign by Google advocates.

      Methinks you didn’t WANT to believe what he oh-so-correctly anticipates, that you let your heart override your head. Your privilege, of course, but don’t expect a lot of people to join you in hating on the messenger just because he made clear what the law of htis land is all about, rather than getting all freedom fighter for some absolute notion of what people who offer OSS ought to be able to do.

      PS: as somebody who sticks up for inventors and the incredible progress we’ve made because of them, I’m thrilled that we have a predictable set of laws, rather than just some big megacorp being able to do whatever they want. (Including suing you because they want to use your inventions for free.) Google has really hijacked the objective of OSS meaning people being able to control their own software. This case is all about our rights; too bad that Google used OSS as hostage to their efforts to take over the smartphone business.

      • It has nothing to do with his opinion. I enjoy discussions with people of differing opinions; you learn more this way.

        With FOSS, he was completely one-sided in his posts THEN it comes out he’s on Oracle’s payroll. Once I find out your opinion is for sale, I lose respect for said opinion.

        As for what happened, I didn’t even read the article once I saw who wrote it. I also didn’t follow the case so no opinion on the matter other than I expected MOTO to lose [just from the little I read].

        • Walt French

          “I enjoy discussions with people of differing opinions; you learn more this way.”

          “I didn’t even read the article once I saw who wrote it.”

          One of these is not like the other.

          Müller has been very helpful for me in identifying issues that courts consider. He’s obviously not in any position to dictate the outcomes. I am happy to see opinions, including his, that I sometimes disagree with.

          In his case, he’s got a pretty good batting average. You might consider whether you want to hear cheerleading or analysis. There’s lots of the former going around; not too much of the latter.

          • No, they aren’t like each other. They are completely unrelated statements and both are valid.

            No doubt he is very well informed, intelligent, and provides great analysis. I followed his blog for quite a while until the above mentioned Oracle clarification.

            Had he disclosed his contractor position while providing his opinion, I would have completely understood.

            Consider Jim, he has openly stated he has stock in Apple. It isn’t much and he clarified it was a gift from his wife. Disclosure.