×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Apple and Google Joining Forces On Kodak Patents Bid

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the my-enemy-my-ally dept.

Patents 97

TrueSatan writes "Bloomberg reports that Apple and Google have partnered to make a bid of more than $500 million for the Kodak patent portfolio. The bid relates to Kodak's 1,100 imaging patents. 'Kodak obtained commitments for $830 million exit financing last month, contingent on its sale of the digital imaging patents for at least $500 million.' This is likely to be an opening bid, with the final figure being far larger. By comparison, a group including Apple, Microsoft, and RIM bought Nortel's 6000+ patents for $4.5 billion last year. 'Google lost the auction for those patents after making an initial offer of $900 million.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'm tired of Google's power grab (-1, Troll)

GPLfella (2790993) | about 2 years ago | (#42225233)

They have really lost their old ways. Before Google was the simple web search company. You used them to find things and that was it. Now they're just trying to grab even larger market share buy playing games with Android.

I know a thing or two about search that people either Google or Bing won't tell you. Google is mostly trying to sleaze their hidden tracking and platforms to play the big game. They know they need this tracking to further their services. Not their search service but their ad service. It has been getting more intrusive all the time and it's about time we do something about it.

You know what's the newest role in this? Their "AdChoices" tracking platform. Not only are you now served ads on a single page but they actually follow you around! Whatever I've searched for on Google is now advertised me on Slashdot and all the different websites I go to!

Google also has secretive deals with NSA, CSI and FBI. They have gongressman that are willing to step in for them. They played their way in to all the government agencies. They have absolutely no shame in doing this. They've started to play around with patents and are using every possible way they can do further their own goal.

I can't understand why you people defend Google on Slashdot. Yes they might use open source but only because it suits their model better! They don't care about your privacy and in fact they're largely the reason why you're losing it. Yes they're mostly free services but only because it's fueled by HUGE, and I mean HUGE, tracking platforms that sends EVERYTHING you do to Google. They are single handedly the web's LARGEST PRIVACY VIOLATION AND YOU SUPPORT THEM?

Hell, at least with Microsoft and PAID software I know I'm not losing my privacy. You might not care about your own privacy but I still do. And who will Google use it's new patent portfolio against? Microsoft and Apple, the two companies that don't leak all your stuff all over the internet!

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (-1, Troll)

Internal Modem (1281796) | about 2 years ago | (#42225311)

You are spot on with your comments. Slashdot has really gone downhill. There is no reason for you to be marked "Troll."

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225419)

How many Googlers read slashdot now? Too many. Chances that the person who marked the message as "Troll" is a Googler? High.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (5, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#42225457)

There is no reason for you to be marked "Troll."

Someone manages to get a huge long first post. That post repeats the standard Microsoft / Facebook trolling line that Google has gone downhill. That post SHOUTS and SCREAMS. The post mentions privacy violation without mentioning Facebook, about the only company willing to sell on fully identifiable material about any user on to almost anybody who signs up as a "developer".

Worst of all, the job of the "Troll" is to hijack the conversation and direct it elsewhere. In my case back to the topic on hand. We are discussing about which company has the worst privacy record which is completely offtopic; you are discussing meta issues as old as the hills (I am sure there one early comment on Slashdot: "Slashdot has gone downhill since comments started started last week"). Why aren't we discussing:

Why the hell are Google being forced to spend money on supporting Lawyers and the legal system instead of putting that money into development and "innovation"?

Are these legitimate patents on a real "inventions" or are they unconstitutional and illegal attempts to control freedom of thought and expression by using the USPTO to circumvent the first amendment and the US constitutions restrictions on patenting mathematics?

Is it just software patents that are broken, or is has the entire patent system become outdated? Is this maybe an example of the patent system working to protect the Kodak pensioners? Do you deserve money if your company fails to put it's invention out to real customers?

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (0, Troll)

Internal Modem (1281796) | about 2 years ago | (#42225509)

All of his points were correct. You did not refute a single one. If you don't think I'm glad you don't think Slashdot has been on a steady decline for the past 10 years, but that is just an aside--not a hijack. You chose to hijack my post by failing to address the main topic: All of his comments were spot on.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (3, Interesting)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#42225827)

You did not refute a single one.

Have a look in the history of every article in the last year which matches the string "Google". You will find that either as first post, or very soon afterwards there is a post which puts up lines like "Google is the worst privacy violator" "Google has become worse than Microsoft" etc. etc. In response to those posts will be many posts which completely refute your points. This has been repeated so often it's not funny. I have even posted in some of those discussions myself. For us to repeat those discussions would be "redundant" and I would hate that.

One of the biggest and most common examples of these accusations of Google becoming 'just as bad' is that their buying up patents is a sign they will become just as bad as Microsoft, which is using stupid patents like the one on the FAT filesystem to attack smaller developers (have a look at this Slashdot discussion about TomTom for example [slashdot.org] ). However, we have not yet seen any evidence of this. Google still hasn't sued any small developer companies. However, this is relevant to our topic of discussion because Google working with Apple is new.

Do you think that now that Google has teamed up with Apple it is a sign that they want to join Apple's attacks on competitors? Maybe instead you think that this is a sign that Apple has come to its senses and realised that Microsoft is still a threat to our chances of a standardised mixed computing environment where Google just wants that system to exist so they can continue to have a chance to provide search and advertising?

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Internal Modem (1281796) | about 2 years ago | (#42225925)

Do you think that now that Google has teamed up with Apple it is a sign that they want to join Apple's attacks on competitors? Maybe instead you think that this is a sign that Apple has come to its senses and realised that Microsoft is still a threat to our chances of a standardised mixed computing environment where Google just wants that system to exist so they can continue to have a chance to provide search and advertising?

Since you asked, I would answer "yes" to both questions since they are not mutually exclusive.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

maroberts (15852) | about 2 years ago | (#42231813)

Also if you look at the OPs list of comments, there is just this single comment - the account was obviously set up for just this one article. A normal commenter will post often and on a wide range of subjects.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (2)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#42238457)

Yep, the fact that the real story here, the ONLY fucking story, is Apple joining forces with Google, so I guess troll points for the troll for hijacking such a momentous event *sigh*.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 years ago | (#42225529)

This article is about Google. Facebook has absolutely nothing to do with it and doesn't need to me mentioned not discussed.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (4, Informative)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#42225645)

This discussion thread was about the accusation that Google is "the web's LARGEST PRIVACY VIOLATION" and that we "SUPPORT THEM?"

Google is a pioneer of techniques, a number of them patented, which allow them to hold data about you whilst ensuring that it is anonymized even to their own employees, let alone to outside advertising agencies.

Facebook, on the other hand, directly shares your full profile including your PII with it's partners in advertising and apps. That clearly makes them a larger "PRIVACY VIOLATION" than Google and makes them 100% on topic in this particular thread which has, for some reason, been voted up extremely high.

I wonder if the reason that Facebook vilolates privacy so much more strongly than Google is because they fear Google's patents? That would be strange when Google never initiated patent action against anyone yet. Maybe it's because that's a missing element in Microsoft's portfolio and that's what attracted Microsoft to invest so heavily in Facebook? Do you think Google's increasing patent portfolio will increase or decrease privacy on the internet?

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

node 3 (115640) | about 2 years ago | (#42227479)

No, Facebook is a red herring on your part. Google *is* the web's largest privacy violation (far more than Facebook, and yes, Facebook is bad, but at least there you know you are doing things in public!), and yes, *we* (Slashdotters in general) support them, whereas we tend to be much less supporting of Facebook.

You seem to have a problem with the original first poster for posting his opinion, yet have not, in any of your replies, done anything to rebut his opinion, but merely stated your own. All the while seemingly oblivious to the irony of it all.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#42225617)

thank you. I typed up replies to troll garbage for sake of "not letting their factless post sit", but I think what you said is more succinct and does the job.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

tylikcat (1578365) | about 2 years ago | (#42225677)

+1 (This would be posted right after I'd been inactive due to flu, and therefore without mod points.)

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

lilfields (961485) | about 2 years ago | (#42226175)

It's ok that Google and Apple are being patent trolls, and anti-privacy because "other companies are doing it too!"

Excellent logic there. Google isn't going downhill, but their ethics sort of are. Their dive hasn't been as steep as Apple's though, I will grant them that...but when ethically Microsoft is probably one of the best among the tech giants...something is wrong.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Silas is back (765580) | about 2 years ago | (#42227329)

...but when ethically Microsoft is probably one of the best among the tech giants...something is wrong.

Exactly my thoughts.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

AngryDill (740460) | about 2 years ago | (#42227741)

It's ok that Google and Apple are being patent trolls...

I'm ordinarily the last one to defend Apple, but you clearly have no idea what a "patent troll" actually is. I abhor their use of dubious patents as a way to oppress any and all competition, but they do actually produce a product. Any if Google has been busy suing competitors, I haven't been hearing about it.

-a.d.-

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#42226499)

Why is slashdot not preventing posting AC or new accounts from posting within ten minutes of a story going up?

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nostromo21 (1947840) | about 2 years ago | (#42238463)

+1

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225525)

He is not 'spot on' with his comments. He is spreading unfounded statements and general FUD. He is most likely marked troll because there is no 'paid shill' moderation.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Internal Modem (1281796) | about 2 years ago | (#42225629)

What part of his statements are unfounded and FUD? I'm asking you to think for yourself.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225751)

Unfounded:

Google also has secretive deals with NSA, CSI and FBI. They have gongressman that are willing to step in for them. They played their way in to all the government agencies.

I'd also add that this is the only company that I know of that *does* provide a summary of the requests they've got from government agencies and how many they complied with. They're not the only one that gets the requests.

How about;

Microsoft and Apple, the two companies that don't leak all your stuff all over the internet!

I'm not completely sure, but I'm pretty sure both of those companies have had more security problems with personal information than Google. Overall though, all three have a decent record with personal information as corporations go. Their general behaviour is a different matter.

FUD; true, or half-true statements like:

You know what's the newest role in this? Their "AdChoices" tracking platform. Not only are you now served ads on a single page but they actually follow you around! Whatever I've searched for on Google is now advertised me on Slashdot and all the different websites I go to!

It's true, but can easily be turned off.

I consider privacy the ability to keep what information I want to myself. I use lots of Google services. I know I'm trading personal information for them. To me, as long as they keep my personal information to themselves, I'm happy. I don't even mind if they sell it as long as it's *completely* anonymous. They've got a very good record for security and keeping private information private. Privacy-wise, the ones I'm personally more concerned about ISPs.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225979)

I'm not completely sure, but I'm pretty sure both of those companies have had more security problems with personal information than Google.

You complain about unfounded statements, then make your own?

I consider privacy the ability to keep what information I want to myself. I use lots of Google services. I know I'm trading personal information for them. To me, as long as they keep my personal information to themselves, I'm happy. I don't even mind if they sell it as long as it's *completely* anonymous.

You apparently care less about privacy that some people, and you haven't read Google's privacy policy or you'd know that the data they do share is not completely anonymous. The policy is worded very carefully to make it look like what they share is anonymous, but they give themselves the ability to share *everything* about you, with anyone, at their whim. If you actually cared about your data being completely anonymous, you'd drop Google's services in a heartbeat.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (4, Insightful)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 2 years ago | (#42225385)

Google is mostly trying to sleaze their hidden tracking and platforms to play the big game. They know they need this tracking to further their services. Not their search service but their ad service.

Stop deluding yourself; everyone already knows this.

Hell, at least with Microsoft and PAID software I know I'm not losing my privacy.

Haha. Hahaha. Bwahahaha.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225505)

I originally switched to using Linux full time because of Microsoft's privacy abuses and processes that 'phone home'.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 2 years ago | (#42225545)

That is fine, just don't use Ubuntu. The other distros don't phone home.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225569)

I actually do generally use Ubuntu, but using KDE rather than Unity. Admittedly this is more because of Unity than privacy problems. Still, with Unity you know the privacy violation is happening and can disable it through a simple setting. Microsoft (back in the Vista days at least) was quietly sending things from your machine to them without announcing it in any way, and without any benefit to the users. I actually originally started looking at the behaviour because I thought it was a virus.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42226561)

No, no, he's right: He's not losing it, he's just offering money for them to take it, which they accept like the nice people they are.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (0)

grumpy_old_grandpa (2634187) | about 2 years ago | (#42225399)

Indeed, Slashdot has become a rat's nest for astroturfers and shills. Mod parent up!

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225441)

Yes, it sure has. For example, look at a several-paragraph post bashing Google, posted by a brand-new user on the same minute as the story went up.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225401)

There seems to be a lot of corporate allegiance (to Google, Apple, even Microsoft, text editors, etc). It's like a modern version of religion so facts and reality don't apply.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225957)

Sometimes it's not so bad ... I like when people share their opinions on products, both good and bad. The important part though, is that they're products. They're not a religion, and if you blindly defend their faults, you're treating them like they are. It's not a personal insult if someone doesn't agree with you. Also, these companies are not going to be as likely to correct bad behaviour if people keep blindly defending them and throwing money at them, even if you don't like the way they're behaving. .

Oh yay, the shills are back (4, Informative)

Xest (935314) | about 2 years ago | (#42225477)

High UID brand new account, anti-Google, pro-Microsoft, long first post, no other posting history shill is back again.

I guess Microsoft started paying for their subscription to Fuckface & Wankhead or whatever that PR agency is called.

Or maybe Florian Mueller is doing a bit of shilling on the side now that the mainstream press seems to have finally realised he's wrong about just about everything since 99% of the patent claims against Android would successfully win against Android, and, er, didn't. Hard times to be a shill I guess now that the world has woken up to the FUD.

Re:Oh yay, the shills are back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42228235)

If a post from a user with a high UID makes good points, why does it matter whether it's a new user or not? Conversely, if a post from a high UID user makes unsupportable points, why not shoot down the points themselves?

I'm getting tired of this lazy approach so many people here are taking nowadays - don't shoot down the post itself, instead attack the user. Claim they're a shill, claim they're a sock puppet belonging to some other /.'er, and so on. Who cares, really?

If you think you have a good point that runs counter to the other guy's post, argue your damn point! If you can't do that... maybe your position needs reexamination.

Re:Oh yay, the shills are back (1)

Xest (935314) | about 2 years ago | (#42232071)

Because the post was completely off-topic, and full of lies perhaps?

It's an attempt to derail the conversation away from the actual topic and spread anti-Google, pro-MS propaganda related to privacy in a topic that has nothing to do with privacy.

Why would we want to facilitate that, and allow the shill at the other end to get paid for it exactly?

low uid are like college degrees (1)

Dareth (47614) | about 2 years ago | (#42236515)

Low uid are like college degrees. If you have one you find yourself having to defend its worth. Yes I have both and they are worth it. Got them at the same time actually.

Re:Oh yay, the shills are back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42232273)

Because a PR company could never pre-register accounts before they're needed?

Not everyone is a shill fella.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#42225555)

Really, you act like google is doing something bad, while pulling a false flag troll, and saying that google has done too much since they were doing search?

Then you mention BING, which is not something Microsoft was always doing, and yet trashtalk google?

this is the laziest troll I hvae ever seen, made more explicit with a title of "GPLfella".

MS has made non-secret deals with the NSA, CSI (who don't matter) and FBI. If you think MS has shame, you forget they've been doing this for 20 years. Why do we defend google? because they're fucking honest, and actually improve their products. Is MS? You tell me after shit like http://www.pcworld.com/article/2018707/microsofts-droidrage-twitter-campaign-backfires.html [pcworld.com] . Is Apple? You tell me when they're losing lawsuits that were basically patent extortion attempts all brought around by the rockstar consortium consisting of apple/ms/nokia (basically everyone not google).

So yeah, umm, let's act like google's the bad one here, and not even look at apple either? If they're together on this the question is if the patent warfare can be defused, not "omg google is evil", you lazy fucking troll.

Use Ghostery (1)

Andy Prough (2730467) | about 2 years ago | (#42225565)

and delete your cookies. Don't be dumb.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 2 years ago | (#42225599)

As others have commented, this is *your* first ever post- under this account anyway- *and* the first post in the thread.

I can't understand why you people defend Google on Slashdot.

As I've commented before, it was undeniably true that Slashdotters were very pro-Google and uncritical. The emphasis being on *was*, as this hasn't been the case for several years now. Not that they haven't got their uncritical fans, but it's no longer an obvious consensus. I'll note that you've actually been modded to +5 now.

And as others have said, your own motives are suspicious. It's ironic that I'd probably agree with a lot of what you said, but the fact that you said all that about Google yet completely omitted to mention Facebook, a company even more contemptious (*) of its users' privacy and openly cynical about it to anyone with half a brain.

(*) This doesn't excuse Google, the fact that Facebook are worse doesn't stop them from being bad.

Hell, at least with Microsoft and PAID software I know I'm not losing my privacy.

This is a bit too obvious and makes me wonder whether you're actually an incompetent PR guy/girl or if you're actually a somewhat sophisticated troll. I remember a while back, the "MyCleanPC" spam was constantly being reposted- which was mildly annoying in itself. But what was more annoying were the people cluttering up the thread with offtopic responses and schemes to attack the supposed spammer. Despite the fact that by that point many of the reposts were coming from accounts with obviously offensive names that any real spammer wouldn't have chosen. (The original might have been genuine spam, the reposts were obviously trolls).

Result? Clever troll ropes legions of halfwitted wannabe vigilantes into replying to him. This one isn't as obvious, but you have to wonder :-/

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 2 years ago | (#42225643)

You actually permit the tracking to track you?

Why don't you run down to your local electronics outlet. Or, Newegg, if you prefer. Grab one of the newer Netgear routers. Bring it home, and flash it with a generic Tomato firmware. Then, flash it again, with Toastman's flavored Tomato. In the startup scripts, you can tell the router to download an adblocking list, at boot up, then every xxx number of hours afterward.

I use a lot of Google services. But, google's tracking servers are blocked. Google's adservers are blocked. I almost never see adverts, unless they are hosted on the site that I am visiting.

Of course, if you're sophisticated enough to know that Google is tracking you, and how they are tracking you - then you already knew how to block it, right?

UNLESS, of course, you're just parroting something you read somewhere.

As for the patents - I can't get terribly excited that Google is building up a portfolio. Every large corporation in the business has it's portfolio. And, every large corporation in the business uses, or threatens to use, their portfolio to put other corporations out of business. Others have defended Google and/or other corporations in the past for maintaining "defensive portfolios". There's really nothing to see here, people. Take a look, and move along - there are much more exciting attractions down the street.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225919)

MS is the original company to sell your information. And they have a CLOSE arrangement with NSA, CIA, China's gov, etc. Hell, they GAVE their source code to the Chinese gov. And when China's gov wanted all of the search engines to give them access to data, Yahoo and MS were seen by the gov. as cooperating, while Google fought them all the way, until it was mutually agreed that they leave. And you think that MS is a good guy?

Google has been sued by Apple and MS over patents. Google has NEVER started a battle on this. BUT, MS, Apple, Sun, etc have. And yet, you scream that Google is the bad guy?

You are GPL in name only. At this point, I am guessing that you work for MS and are just astroturfing.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42226865)

Ah the useless piece of shit Microsoft Shills have arrived to pollute this Google related thread with their shit again. This is how Microsoft markets nowadays. They're sleazy bottom feeders whose idea of good marketing is #droidrage, Scroogled, GMail Man and who can forget the iPhone funeral procession. Their latest dirt bag campaign is accusing Android of having malware. This is from a company with a desktop OS that has zero day viruses and malware released everyday for it. It's also an OS that controls armies of zombie bots. There is no OS that has been compromised more than Windows. Microsoft is truly one of the most marketing retarded companies in the world. It's so bad that people are starting to laugh at their pathetic attempts.

They're Phone and Tablets are failing at alarming rates and the decline of PC sales and their Windows 8 OS has them scared shit. So much so that they're trying to throw this shit at their competitors because they seem to think they're relevant. They're a dinosaur and they deserve to become extinct.

Re:I'm tired of Google's power grab (1)

Conspire (102879) | about 2 years ago | (#42232877)

They have really lost their old ways. Before Google was the simple web search company. You used them to find things and that was it. Now they're just trying to grab even larger market share buy playing games with Android. I know a thing or two about search that people either Google or Bing won't tell you. Google is mostly trying to sleaze their hidden tracking and platforms to play the big game. They know they need this tracking to further their services. Not their search service but their ad service. It has been getting more intrusive all the time and it's about time we do something about it. You know what's the newest role in this? Their "AdChoices" tracking platform. Not only are you now served ads on a single page but they actually follow you around! Whatever I've searched for on Google is now advertised me on Slashdot and all the different websites I go to! Google also has secretive deals with NSA, CSI and FBI. They have gongressman that are willing to step in for them. They played their way in to all the government agencies. They have absolutely no shame in doing this. They've started to play around with patents and are using every possible way they can do further their own goal. I can't understand why you people defend Google on Slashdot. Yes they might use open source but only because it suits their model better! They don't care about your privacy and in fact they're largely the reason why you're losing it. Yes they're mostly free services but only because it's fueled by HUGE, and I mean HUGE, tracking platforms that sends EVERYTHING you do to Google. They are single handedly the web's LARGEST PRIVACY VIOLATION AND YOU SUPPORT THEM? Hell, at least with Microsoft and PAID software I know I'm not losing my privacy. You might not care about your own privacy but I still do. And who will Google use it's new patent portfolio against? Microsoft and Apple, the two companies that don't leak all your stuff all over the internet!

Can I sort for the highest Troll scores? It seems that that is the only way to see something useful here! Really, a thread like this gets a troll?

Oh Joy.. (4, Insightful)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | about 2 years ago | (#42225259)

Two behemoths fighting it out to have more power and control. Just what everyone needs.

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

p43751 (170402) | about 2 years ago | (#42225307)

relax, its just for 20-25 years. Our kids will love it

Re:Oh Joy.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225309)

In this case they're working together to ensure the fight will eventually be between just them and no 3rd parties.

Godzilla and Mothra (1)

hoboroadie (1726896) | about 2 years ago | (#42225325)

Between Fuji Film and Kodak, who's concerned about the film photographer? I guess I could start dipping glass plates.

Re:Godzilla and Mothra (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225819)

Film relied on the vast volume bought by Hollywood and Commercial photographers.

When they switched to digital, that was the end of film other than a niche product.

Re:Godzilla and Mothra (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#42225991)

Perhaps they can use them against the probable "X, but on a smartphone" patent trolls.

Re:Godzilla and Mothra (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 years ago | (#42226755)

I don't know why the person who wrote the summary would think these patents would be worth much more money.

There already was a auction where multiple groups of companies bid for these patents [where Apple and Google were in separate groups], and the highest bid never came close to $500mil.

Does the person think some other company missed the first auction and is now going to go for it in this one? I don't think so.

Hell, I don't know why Apple/Google don't just let this auction fail again [as nobody else appears willing to pony up the half billion dollars], let Kodak fail to get the extra $800+ million funding, then pick up the patents for even less later on.

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

Xest (935314) | about 2 years ago | (#42225493)

Well look on the bright side, if Apple and Google are working together at least it wont create a new storm of iOS vs. Android patent wars.

The only victim in this would probably be Microsoft, then MS would have less money to pay first post brand new user Slashdot shills to talk bollocks. Wouldn't that be a shame?

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#42225639)

I'm actually hoping (noone knows till we find out the results), but I'm hoping that the only way google would sign on with apple is to defuse patent warfare, not "just protect ourselves".

Re:Oh Joy.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225889)

LOL.
What's particularly amusing is that I suspect you're not one of Google's paid shills.

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

demachina (71715) | about 2 years ago | (#42225833)

Your interpretation is incorrect, not sure how it got modded up. This is a case of two behemoths colluding to build huge patent portfolio's to:

A. Protect themselves from patent law suits by competitors, though it doesn't really help against patent trolls since trolls don't make anything and can't use portfolios to defend against them

B. Potentially lock out competitors and disruptive small companies.

Startups and small companies tend to be the biggest casualties in this behavior since they usually don't have patent portfolios they can horse trade with to defend against patent suits and to cross license with the huge companies with the huge patent portfolios.

It remains to be seen if Apple and Google use their portfolio offensively or defensively. If its defensively its not a problem. If they use it to crush potential competitors it is horrible.

  Apple is obviously the more aggressive of the two in using patents to crush competition, but then Android, Samsung and HTC did pretty aggressively copy the iPhone in the early days.

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

Grave (8234) | about 2 years ago | (#42226089)

What competitors? They are only competing with each other. RIM and Microsoft are not competition at this point. Apple and Google teaming up on this is actually the best possible thing that can happen.

Let me put this in historical terms:

It's kind of like the earliest treaties between the USSR and USA regarding nuclear weapons. Sure, China/England/France had some nukes, but either superpower could have swatted those three down without an issue. Those early treaties weren't very substantial, and covered very few weapon systems. Yet they laid the groundwork for future cooperation, and eventual de-fusing of the Cold War.

Frankly, the more cross-licensing the better. It's our only hope until someone finally wises up and ends patents entirely. Had the patent system worked out like nuclear weapons (preventing global-scale wars due to MADD, or in this case, massive litigation resulting in sales bans), then I would be in favor of simple patent reform. Unfortunately, it's been shown that corporations can't be trusted to act in the best interests of consumers, the economy, or themselves when it comes to patents.

Not competitors Patent trolls (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42227857)

What competitors? They are only competing with each other. RIM and Microsoft are not competition at this point.

Ignoring the cold war Analogy [its best to]. Rim and Nokiasoft, may not be in competition, but that is when they are most problematic to those that are. Like....Kodak was litigious during its dying days. Nokia and Microsoft have formed a Patent troll company, just to attack [Microsofts usual bride; bully tactics] the more successful companies. In fact Microsoft have been bragging about its solitary troll dealing, Apple *pay* Nokia for their patents. You are arguing that Apple & Google preserving their current duopoly is a good thing, by them colluding on the purchase of massive patent portfolios...I'm really not seeing that either.

Startups (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229191)

Frankly, the more cross-licensing the better.

Once cross-licensing of patents among established companies becomes the norm, how should a startup company protect itself from patent liability?

Re:Startups (1)

Grave (8234) | about 2 years ago | (#42230169)

The same way they always have - by getting bought out.

When patents are gone, startups can thrive. Until then, their only hope is for someone to buy them up.

Re:Oh Joy.. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#42233467)

It remains to be seen if Apple and Google use their portfolio offensively or defensively. If its defensively its not a problem. If they use it to crush potential competitors it is horrible.

    Apple is obviously the more aggressive of the two in using patents to crush competition,

Uh what?

It remains to be seen if Google will use their portfolio aggressively, but we already know about Apple.

Say cheese (5, Funny)

spcebar (2786203) | about 2 years ago | (#42225317)

They may take our patents... but they'll never take our Kodak Moments.

Re:Say cheese (2)

jovius (974690) | about 2 years ago | (#42225683)

Kodak Moments - soon to be stored in Picasa and iCloud at the mercy of the owners. Regular Moments free and Premium Moments start at $0.99. (Terms of service: Images are automatically categorized as Regular or Premium.)

Local economy? (5, Insightful)

RITjobbie (211397) | about 2 years ago | (#42225335)

It's too bad the cash from this patent selloff won't likely be seen in the local economy of Rochester, NY, Kodak's home town. We've pretty much given up completely on the once largest local employer. Too many of my friends have long since had severance packages run out. She's not sinking, rather she's already resting on the bottom of the ocean flapping a bit.

I wonder what is actually in the patent portfolio that Google and Apple can sue each other over in 5 years.

Re:Local economy? (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 2 years ago | (#42227375)

We've pretty much given up completely on the once largest local employer. [..] She's not sinking, rather she's already resting on the bottom of the ocean flapping a bit.

Yes- unfortunately, Kodak is quite clearly doomed at this point. It's now far too late for them to reinvent themselves as Fujifilm did. They've already been selling off their assets (including patents) for a while, and continuing to do so will ensure their short-term survival for a bit longer. Of course, this basically dooms them in the long term.

But even if Kodak survives, the basic problem is that there's probably no real reason for a company to exist in Kodak's present form- I'm guessing it's going to be worth more split up and sold off, particularly minus the liabilities.

The film division might continue to exist, but if successful, it'll likely be as a far more niche manufacturer.

The name will (of course) survive, but that's all it'll really be. At best it'll be sold to a company in a superficially similar line of business to what Kodak was formerly best-known for (consumer imaging), possibly one that bought some of Kodak's old divisions. At worst it'll be a brand name to be whored around cheaply to distributors of random generic electronics from the Far East looking to gain some misplaced brand recognition.

That said, even the name is probably worth less in terms of consumer recognition than it would have been 15 years ago. It's a relic of the mass-market camera film era, and unfortunately people have moved on.

Ghost town sponsored by severance (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229303)

Too many of my friends have long since had severance packages run out.

I don't get it. Was the severance package not enough to cover moving to another town?

Why can a patent survive bankruptcy (2)

graphius (907855) | about 2 years ago | (#42225403)

The only reason a patent can be sold during a bankruptcy is because the patent is recorded as an asset on the books. (yet "goodwill" can also be valued as an asset but cannot be sold...)

The original purpose of patents was to publicly record trade secrets so that they would not be lost to future generations. If a company goes bankrupt, shouldn't their limited monopoly be opened to the public?

Re:Why can a patent survive bankruptcy (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#42225513)

If your reason for patents are correct then yes.

Re:Why can a patent survive bankruptcy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42226127)

If a company goes bankrupt, shouldn't their limited monopoly be opened to the public?

Not if they can be sold and that revenue used to make their creditors whole (or at least closer to it). Most business runs on one form of credit or another, even if it's getting billed at the end of the month or paying their balance from a statement. If there's no chance that *all* assets won't be sold in the result of bankruptcy then many businesses will find their vendors cutting them off at the first sign (or even rumor) of financial strains, and that would be a death knell for any business that is having a tough go of things.

Re:Why can a patent survive bankruptcy (1)

graphius (907855) | about 2 years ago | (#42226247)

So explain to me why creditors (who charge interest based on risk) should be guaranteed payback?

Goodwill == trademark value (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229835)

yet "goodwill" can also be valued as an asset but cannot be sold

Today I bought some goodwill. Well, actually, I bought a stuffed toy at a Goodwill store, but whatever.

But seriously, I was under the impression that "goodwill" was equal to the value of a business's brand, or the sum of the values of all its trademarks considered as a bundle.

Re:Goodwill == trademark value (1)

graphius (907855) | about 2 years ago | (#42233673)

"goodwill" was equal to the value of a business's brand

Not quite. If a company sells a trademark, the "goodwill" value goes largely away. Look at GE: Way back in time, it was one of the big names in electronics. Once the name was sold to a chinese company, the value of the brand went to nothing...

As an aside, when you bought something at the Goodwill store, I would argue that you gave goodwill, rather than bought it ;~)

Imagine (4, Interesting)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#42225447)

Imagine an investment of 500 Million into Libreoffice development. Imagine 50 Million for Wine. That would make a real difference. The patent system is like a parasitarian economy created on top of the markets. It should be abolished. But we won't get 5 million $ for patent reformists.

Re:Imagine (1)

malloc (30902) | about 2 years ago | (#42225741)

Imagine 50 Million for Wine.

One could be hung over for long time on that. Unless, of course, you meant to say "imagine $50 million for improving Free apps so Wine isn't needed".

Re:Imagine (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#42226589)

I think that Wine would be needed anyway. It is still a migration barrier. I enjoy how many old application work with Wine in the meantime. Money means more developers which speeds things up.

Re:Imagine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42226309)

The 0.01% will spend $50 million on wine while the rest of us are drinking bottom-shelf vodka and sleeping under bridges.

Re:Imagine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42226797)

Yea, because large companies should sink money into what you are interested in, not what will benefit their shareholders. Good call.

Re:Imagine (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#42232335)

I think it would be a huge leverage against the competition, just as patents. With Libreoffice investment Google would target Microsoft's cash cow.

1100 patents for digital imaging? (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#42225487)

I can understand Kodak owning some patents for digital imaging, but 1100? Are there really 1100 different ways of doing digital imaging, or just 1100 obvious ways of combining seven novel ideas?

Re:1100 patents for digital imaging? (2)

feedayeen (1322473) | about 2 years ago | (#42225511)

I can understand Kodak owning some patents for digital imaging, but 1100? Are there really 1100 different ways of doing digital imaging, or just 1100 obvious ways of combining seven novel ideas?

I don't know, there's over 5000 different ways to combine 7 ideas. I'm betting it was 6.

The original idea was different (2, Interesting)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#42225637)

As everything else that turned evil (Big Brother, Apartheid, international law, stocks), the original idea was dutch. Octroois were designed to make a design public, registered to the owner, so others could implement it AND pay for it. The idea was NOT to give a company a monopoly on an idea, the goal was the EXACT opposite. That the idea of ONE man could be used by anyone BUT they had to pay for it.

It started because people invented novel ways for water management were it was obvious the ideas belonged to one person but were of use to everyone, so it made sense to allow everyone to implement a new pump yet still reward the original inventor. It was the FRAND idea taken even further and core to the system.

This system ALSO insured something else, an octrooi HAD to be a real design. After all, the idea of pumping water was hardly new. You would ONLY play to use a new octrooi if it gave you the full design to build a new pump. Patents ARE supposed to be the same, a patent application should include all the details needed for a master in the craft to build the item. You CANNOT patent merely an idea or a business plan because there is nothing there that a CRAFTSMAN (NOT AN INVENTOR) can use to build. Collect all the patents related to the internal combustion engine, and you can build one. Collect the patents on a Apple patent, and you can build nothing but a legal case in a bought court.

It doesn't mean ALL patents are useless but a lot are. There is also a practice as done by Lego of patenting EVERYTHING you can think off just to stop someone else from doing anything. Lego made claims for all the alternative ideas they could think of to make building blocks so nobody could make anything even remotely similar. That there are patents for eternal motion machines should tell you enough, how can a craftsman skilled in the trade possibly make an eternal motion machine? Patents don't even have to work, so why not patent all your failed research just to prevent someone else from making it work?

The entire patent system lost its original goal. It was designed to SPREAD inventions while the original inventor was compensated and instead is used to limit the spread of inventions, stifle new invenstions and keep the rich rich.

But hey, good luck getting it to change. When you do, why not reform wallstreet at the same time to get the stock market to be about investment instead of speculation again? Oh and that UN thing to be about peace rather then self interests? That would be nice to if you are out fixing the world.

Re:The original idea was different (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42231453)

I gave you +1 Insightful because +1 Depressing isn't an option.

Re:1100 patents for digital imaging? (2)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#42225695)

well you have the picture
you have the picture taken in different light
you have the same picture taken in

aww hell, the patent office successfully never read 1100 patents and just rubberstamped them. That's basically what it was.

Re:1100 patents for digital imaging? (3, Insightful)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 2 years ago | (#42227401)

I can understand Kodak owning some patents for digital imaging, but 1100? Are there really 1100 different ways of doing digital imaging, or just 1100 obvious ways of combining seven novel ideas?

Honestly? Without having looked into it, I'm willing to bet that quite a lot of those patents are legitimate old-style "proper" patents on real worthwhile things that Slashdotters would approve of. Bear in mind that Kodak did quite a lot of research into this, and probably came up with a lot of stuff, they just never commercialised it successfully.

Of course, these patents may be being bought and used for "bad" reasons, but that doesn't mean they were crappy patents in the first place.

Are there really 1100 different ways of doing digital imaging, or just 1100 obvious ways of combining seven novel ideas?

Do you genuinely believe that there are only seven truly patentable ideas in digital imaging?

Re:1100 patents for digital imaging? (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#42233587)

Of course not. But 1100 is a lot of patents.

Just what we need, two monopolists acting as one (3)

JoeyRox (2711699) | about 2 years ago | (#42225489)

The patent system is to supposed to protect ideas but what it does instead is protect monopolies and stifles creative destruction.

Re:Just what we need, two monopolists acting as on (1)

CrkHead (27176) | about 2 years ago | (#42229129)

I thought the patent system was supposed to provide a company with a legally protected monopoly for a period of time in exchange with the invention being published so others could benefit from it and advance the state of the art.

Duopoly perhaps :) (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42229429)

The patent system is to supposed to protect ideas but what it does instead is protect monopolies and stifles creative destruction.

Ironically Google started its massive patent collection, by being attacked by patents from the old duopoly of Microsoft/Apple

Re:Just what we need, two monopolists acting as on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42232283)

In what world is Apple a monopoly?

what, is this a Kodak press release? (1)

sribe (304414) | about 2 years ago | (#42225721)

This is likely to be an opening bid, with the final figure being far larger.

Bullshit. They already tried to auction them once, and failed to get bids anywhere near high enough to satisfy them. This second auction has not magically made these patents vastly more valuable.

Google & Apple joint ownership of Kodak's pate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42225843)

My guess is Google & Apple decided their lawyers already have enough on their table.
Joint ownership of all these patents remove them from the war, keeping it a bit simpler and cheaper.

we need new laws (1)

josepha48 (13953) | about 2 years ago | (#42225939)

that ban the sale or trade of patents. patents were designed to help individuals and now they are just corporate lawsuit tools to go after anyone for anything stupid. if you could not buy patents then when a company goes under all their patents go into the open domain and new companies could profit from using them as well as old

Re:we need new laws (2)

jader3rd (2222716) | about 2 years ago | (#42225971)

that ban the sale or trade of patents. patents were designed to help individuals

One of they ways they were designed to help the individual was to allow the individual to sell the patent to someone who could do something with it.

Kodachrome (1)

tpjunkie (911544) | about 2 years ago | (#42226307)

There are going to be a lot of patents that neither Apple or Google really care about in that portfolio, but people in film photography might. First and foremost in my mind is the proprietary dyes used in processing Kodachrome film, which Kodak stopped manufacturing years ago, and the last processor, Dwayne's Photo in Kansas stopped processing at the end of 2010. It would sure be *not evil* to release these formulas to the public, and perhaps we could see something like the group who reproduced polaroid film.

Does everything have to be evil (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42227725)

It would sure be *not evil* to release these formulas to the public

I'm not sure you know what *evil* is. I suspect if either companies have patents that do not cover their [future] products, they can *sell* them, or *license* them, or use them as a bargaining tool etc etc. to make money back from the purchase.

Damn (1)

sensationull (889870) | about 2 years ago | (#42228581)

I liked being able to take photos on non-Apple hardware. The future will suck when Apple is suing everyone about the use autofocus or worse, the use of flash. We know how bad Apple hates flash.

Flash (disambigger than yours) (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229959)

We know how bad Apple hates flash.

So why does Apple solder 8 to 64 gigabytes of it into every iTrinket?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?