Re: A Brief Explanation of Microsoft's Anti-Google Patent FUD
by nitrogen on Saturday August 06, 2011 @07:36PM
(#2855188)
...a lot of Microsoft's patents were created through old fashioned in-house R&D - exactly the sort of innovation which should be protected.
Only if that "innovation" is actually novel, non-obvious, specific, and useful, and certainly not for 20 years (roughly 13 generations in tech years).
It may have been in Google's interest to turn Andorid into Open Source in October of 2008 due to the liability incurred when Microsoft acquired Danger's patent portfolio earlier in the year.
If Android was always based on the Linux kernel, then they probably had an open source plan from the beginning.
Edit: With Android Google stepped into a mature market for the first time and appears to have committed rookie errors
This sounds like code for "Google stepped into our territory and didn't pay its protection money."
Only if that "innovation" is actually novel, non-obvious, specific, and useful, and certainly not for 20 years (roughly 13 generations in tech years).
It may have been in Google's interest to turn Andorid into Open Source in October of 2008 due to the liability incurred when Microsoft acquired Danger's patent portfolio earlier in the year.
If Android was always based on the Linux kernel, then they probably had an open source plan from the beginning.
Edit: With Android Google stepped into a mature market for the first time and appears to have committed rookie errors
This sounds like code for "Google stepped into our territory and didn't pay its protection money."