>“They are very likely to be infringed by code that is at the core of Android,” says IP expert Florian Mueller.<p>Now that's what I call a credible, expert source with no history of distorting the issues. Always good to see the balance and perspective that the business media gives to intellectual property issues in software.
I'm astonished at how broad the patents in question seem to be: <a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about/5946647_System_and_method_for_performing.html?id=aFEWAAAAEBAJ" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/patents/about/5946647_System_and_metho...</a> and <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=nCYJAAAAEBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=6,343,263&hl=en&ei=3rUgTojDCtHXiAKxsaTOAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/patents?id=nCYJAAAAEBAJ&printsec=f...</a><p>The first one especially seems like it could describe any computer system at all. I guess I am just not smart enough to be a patent lawyer, and I say that with a straight, straight face.
"Litigation that attacks open-source products limits consumer choice, hurts the economy, and discourages innovation."<p>I find this interesting, in a world where software patents exist this seems tantamount to saying "software patents ought not to apply to open-source products", does Google really mean this to be read as "[Patent] litigation ... limits consumer choice, hurts the economy, and discourages innovation", if so, given that they are in a better position to influence legislators than I am, what pro-active steps are they taking to change the status of software patents? Or do they really mean "we don't like it when Apple uses patents against us"?
I wonder if the headline was so trollish when Apple violated Nokia's patents and settled by paying.<p>It's actually quite funny to see "media" (blogs included) role in the Mobile Tech reporting - they either troll bait for clicks on both sides or are just supporting their "team" by offense or defense at every opportunity ;)<p>Speaking of which there was this on Slashdot - <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/07/15/1331243/The-Science-Behind-Fanboyism" rel="nofollow">http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/07/15/1331243/The-Scien...</a>
this ruling isn’t final, and Apple’s victory isn’t terribly meaningful in the long term.<p>Source:
<a href="http://thisismynext.com/2011/07/15/preliminary-ruling-finds-htc-infringes-apple-patents/" rel="nofollow">http://thisismynext.com/2011/07/15/preliminary-ruling-finds-...</a><p>PS: that's a real lawyer reporting, so I guess he know what he talking about. Rather than some random reportor
You gotta love how this is one of the most active posts here right now, but it somehow has been relegated to the third page. Fuck Google fanbois and fuck this bullshit that constantly goes on at Hacker News.
> “We are confident the Commission will ultimately agree with the ITC staff’s finding that HTC does not violate any of Apple’s patents. Litigation that attacks open-source products limits consumer choice, hurts the economy, and discourages innovation.”<p>Just like you were confident you'd win those Nortel patents with those cute bids?