News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google Patent Purchase Promotion. Parent comment

Re:Google Patent Purchase Promotion by derf_ on Tuesday April 28, 2015 @12:50PM (#9453640)
> non­exclusive, non­transferable, non­assignable (including by operation of law or otherwise), non­sublicensable

That does no one any good except the seller. For any seller, this kind of thing is table-stakes (no one wants to sell someone a gun pointed at their head).

But if the seller is specifically concerned about their patent being used offensively on others (which I suspect was the original commenter's concern), then this provision is useless.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google Patent Purchase Promotion by minot on Tuesday April 28, 2015 @02:04PM (#9454155)
> non­exclusive, non­transferable, non­assignable (including by operation of law or otherwise), non­sublicensable

I think I am misunderstanding you. If they give much more, Google might as well just pay one to void their patent instead of assuming ownership.

[ Parent | on HN ]