In other words, both sides agree that Google didn't want to enter into a partnership to acquire patents that they couldn't use to sue Microsoft, Apple, et al.<p>Google claims that such suits would only be to defend itself when sued ("no first strike", just mutually assured destruction via countersuits), but Microsoft hasn't replied to that claim.<p>Apparently, without the ability to use these patents to countersue defensively, Google did not consider them worthwhile to pursue.
I'm hoping this eventually ends up in something amusing like the press release exchange Amazon and Barnes & Nobel had a few years ago. Barnes & Noble was purchasing a book distributor, and Amazon released a press release commenting on that, where they compared themselves to David fighting the B&N Goliath: <a href="http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-06-1998/0000795985&EDATE=" rel="nofollow">http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&S...</a><p>Barnes & Noble wasted no time in responding, and pretty much thoroughly pwned Amazon. I can't find B&N's release online anymore to cite, though.<p>Amazon's response? I shall quote it in its entirety:<p><pre><code> SEATTLE, Nov. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- "Oh."
</code></pre>
<a href="http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-06-1998/0000796268&EDATE=" rel="nofollow">http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&S...</a>
That was pretty weak. Microsoft has a history of attacking with patents, so they can't pretend this offends their delicate sensibilities and that they are shocked that some would want to have ways to defend themselves agains them.
Now Microsoft is being disingenuous.<p>The only 'defense' against patents Microsoft holds, and can prosecute against Google, are patents that Google holds, and can prosecute against Microsoft. Sadly, that's how it works.<p>Acquiring new patents, held jointly, could only be used against third parties. Of course if Microsoft thinks it has the momentary advantage, it'd like to freeze that advantage forever by making all new patents jointly shared.<p>Nuclear states are always the biggest fans of non-proliferation!<p>Unless of course Microsoft wasn't just offering to bid jointly, but license all prior IP mutually in perpetuity at the same time? Such a true non-aggression pact would be interesting, if it did not run afoul of antitrust coordination concerns.
This is turning into a big pissing match. If Google was really focused on innovating instead of patenting like they said they wanted to do a few days a go they would let this drop and focus on innovating. The real proof is in the execution, not the banter.<p>The real question is do the lawyers get to charge back to the business for every the tweet? Because if so these guys are racking up some big bucks.