Patent Troll Shell Company Owned By Microsoft And Apple Launches Massive Patent Attack On Android

from the but-of-course dept

About a year and a half ago, we wrote about “Rockstar Consortium,” a shell company set up by Apple and Microsoft (and a few other companies), in which they placed many of the patents they received when they outbid Google to get Nortel’s patents. We noted at the time that one of the reasons regulators let Apple, Microsoft, RIM and others team up to buy these patents without it being an antitrust concern was that they promised that all the patents would be able to be licensed on “reasonable terms.” Except… once they handed them off to Rockstar, that company’s CEO, John Veschi, noted that this promise “does not apply to us.”

So, in a move that surprises basically no one, Rockstar Consortium has sued Google along with most of the major Android phone makers (Asustek, HTC, Huawei, LG Electronics, Pantech, Samsung, and ZTE) claiming they violate a bunch of those old Nortel patents. This is yet another example of the obnoxious practice of privateering patents, where operating companies shuffle patents off to troll shell companies, to avoid having countersuits launched against their own products. It’s pretty obvious that the lawsuits, two of which are listed below, are nothing more than Microsoft and Apple trying to put a dent in Android.

This has nothing to do with patents as innovation, and everything to do with patents trying to stifle competition. Again.





Filed Under: , ,
Companies: apple, google, microsoft, nortel, rockstar consortium

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Patent Troll Shell Company Owned By Microsoft And Apple Launches Massive Patent Attack On Android”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
55 Comments
That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Perhaps it is time that the terms granted to the ‘non-owners’ be introduced to the courts.
Patents are supposed to protect those poor inventors, and it seems highly unfair that a party should pay a cent more than other parties who are also using the same “invention”.

It would be interesting for them to have to disclose how much MS & Apple paid for the rights to use the innovation, and that setting the bar.

Patents are not supposed to be a weapon to stifle innovation so that others in the same space don’t have to keep up with advances in technology.
Patents are not supposed to generate a windfall to those who aren’t competing.
Patents are not supposed to be a gotcha, used after someone else put it into practice to line the pockets of those who do nothing with the innovation.

How patents are being used are not beneficial to the public, who are supposed to benefit from these laws. Higher prices, crappier products, and even being sued for using a device in the market was never what was intended and it is high time this bullshit be put to an end.

Patents, how they currently operate, merely benefit lawyers who are extracting wealth for doing no more than laying in weight for someone to step into the trap.

anonymousesays:

Re: Re:

Obviously the statement by Microsoft and Apple was a lie and they have used them as they said they would not, so the sale must be invalidated and the patents made free to everyone.
Simple solution to a very bad situation. I just hope Google uses the fact that they said they were not going to allow the patents to be used in a patent war against them and get some type of compensation.

Derek Kertonsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

The counter argument that Rockstar uses is that they are an independent company, and none of the shareholders have majority control.

So if you try to hold Apple accountable for Rockstar, Apple just shrugs shoulders and says “They’re out of control! What can we do? We’re powerless. I hope they don’t sue us [heh heh].”

out_of_the_bluesays:

Re: Re: 2 out of 11 are egregious out of the blue mentions for out_of_the_blue!

Gosh, I’m flattered, kids. However, your stupidity makes me despair for the human species.

Unrelated tag-line jammed in as Mike just doesn’t re-write important enough pieces to bring it up:


“Capitalism” in practice today means that your access to capital is only by paying high interest rates to The Rich, while their access to “capital” is at very low rates direct from government printing presses.

01:22:37[b-485-1]

Anonymoussays:

Though I despise patent trolls with the fury of a thousand thunderstorms, I feel no pity whatsoever for Google.

They are slowly scrapping the Android Open Source Project – the only reason to pick Android in the first place – slowly, but surely tightening their grip on the ecosystem. It will become another walled garden soon.

So Google can go die in a fire, as far as I am concerned.

And for those who think that I am crazy, read this:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/11/google-just-pulled-a-facebook-home-kitkats-primary-interface-is-google-search/

John Fendersonsays:

Re: Re:

And for those who think that I am crazy, read this

I read those, and while I don’t think you’re crazy, I do think you’re overly hyperbolic.

Those articles are talking about Google’s completely optional closed-sourced applications. Nothing in those articles indicates that Google is making Android a walled garden. Open source android isn’t going away.

Derek Kertonsays:

Re: Re:

Lovers of open systems are still free to get on board with other totally open, Linux based mobile OSes, like Moblin. Except of course, that they all suck. And always have. But still, you’re free to go there if that’s what you truly want.

But it turns out that developers, handset vendors, and customers all prefer the structure that can be provided by a strong hand on the rudder. Android not completely open, but it’s not closed either. Yet it benefits greatly from the strong guidance provided by Google – an SDK, a roadmap, an app marketplace, etc.

Google also has two versions, more or less. The more proprietary version they offer to their handset partners, and Android Open Source Project (ASOP) version. BTW, note that the handset partners have a lot of leeway in altering Android, adding credence to the “openness” of it.

But if you want even more open than Android, I have a long list of mobile OSes that were mostly open. They all failed compared to their more structured counterparts.
-java (I worked on this here in 1997-99)
-Symbian went open in its dying throes
-Moblin
-Tizen
-MeeGo
-Mer
-Jolla
-Ubuntu Mobile

Notice any big successes in that list? Me neither. It seems the one consistent defining characteristic of a fully open mobile platform is: terrible market adoption. So while a small cadre of true linux geeks continue to moan and try to reveal the “secret” that Android “isn’t really open”, the majority of us already know, and we don’t care.

In here is a GigaOm paper I co-authored on the subject.
http://www.xirrus.com/cdn/pdf/gigaom_futureofwifi_final
-Sailfish
-Ubuntu mobile

Bergmansays:

Re: Re:

This. If the only reason they have the patents at all is because they agreed to license them rather than lock them up, their failure to keep that promise should strip them of ownership.

It’s really no different than the not-quite-a-first-sale license doctrine the companies are all pushing. They sell you stuff, then claim it’s a license not a sale despite the fact that they’re following the rules for sales not licenses. Violate the license and the sale goes away.

Anonymoussays:

So Rockstar has some patents valued in 4. something billion and for which google offered just a bit less so it do not seems likely that they are invalid. And after what? two years? google and rockstar do not get to an agreement in licensing but is not Google that is trying to get them for free is Rockstar that is a patent troll.

At this point we only know that Rockstar and Google are not in agreement and that Rockstar is only asking for money. Is too early to know if Rockstar is a troll or Google what to no have to pay a thing because it think that it can get away with it while their competitors has had to pay several billion dollar to purchase that licences

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Re: Re:

Rockstar is Apple & Microsoft.
They both have dodads in the market competing with Google.
The patents can be used to stop Google from gaining marketshare and prop up the other companies offerings.

I mean its not like there has been tit for tat bullshit keeping phones from being imported for sale… oh wait… Apple.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

They didn’t have to pay $4.6 Billion, they chose to outbid Googles $4.4 Billion and the sale was only allowed to go ahead on the understanding that the patents would be made available at a reasonable price. A condition that would have applied to Google as well. They agreed to the rules of the sale, they should live up to them.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

The purpose of patents isn’t to make people pay to invent and innovate. The whole point is to promote the progress and encourage innovation. That the patent system has turned into a system where one must pay to use a technology or to innovate defeats the purpose. These patents are doing nothing to encourage innovation and are only harming it with the argument “but it’s not fair that one party paid for the patents and the other party still gets to use the technology without paying”. The question to be asked is does this promote the progress and social benefit. I believe the answer is no and so this is a criticism of the patent system. In fact, your post, in trying to assert a different purpose for patents, helps show why the patent system is broken.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

If the article where “the software patents show again its ugly face” or “Patent instrument of war:another chapter”.
I would not have a problem.

What I don’t agree with is the Microsoft & Apple patent troll approach.

Remember when forming what would became Rockstar, Google was offered a chair in the table and it decided to go alone do you thing Google wanted this patents all for itself to give them for free to the world? as has done with the ones of Motorola :P.

Google, Apple and Microsoft are in a three ways patent war, there is no troll and no innocent just 3 very big companies trying to get the maximum advantage of the rules of the game that Google seem to be the worst player although seem to be the most loved by the public is no reason to be easy on them.

With what we know right now prejudging that the one abusing the rules is Rockstar is with what I disagree.

We know Google offered 4. ? Billion$ for this patents and Rockstar paid a bit more.

we know Rockstar is only asking for money so the dispute is only for money not limiting production of anything and Google is not any short in cash small company easy bullied out of it.

and that Google and Rockstar did not agree in how much Google should pay
Apple & Microsft already paid 4.7? Billlion$

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

So because someone paid a fortune for something, it suddenly has that value?

Your new car drops to half value when you drive off the lot.
That diamond drops in value once you buy it.

Just because you paid X doesn’t entitle you to extract X.

And as Rockstar is a separate entity, I’d still like to know how much others using the patents are paying them. I mean unless your charging different rates to hinder others in competition with you in the free market.

Mason Wheelersays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Alternate interpretation: Google knew that Rockstar was being formed as a patent trolling organization, and wanted nothing to do with such a filthy business. Instead, they tried to acquire the patents to keep them out of the hands of the trolls.

Unlike Apple and Microsoft, Google does not have a long record of suing people over patents. I don’t agree with everything they do, but in this particular case they’re clearly the good guys.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

This isn’t rocket science: Google needed defensive patents and you can’t use patents you jointly own with the people attacking you and your business partners defensively. Your approach to this entire subject about ‘prejudging’ is bullshit because it requires the author to completely ignore that there’s a history between all the parties involved. It’s not ‘prejudging’ it’s taking the whole record into account.

Anonymoussays:

and, of course, Congress will be all over this, trying to stamp out this wanton disgraceful behavior by two massive companies who want everything but want to give nothing! the reason is probably because the earnings were down a bit, bue to putting out shit products over the last year, whereas Google has given customers more of ‘what they want’ than more of ‘get they are going to be given’!!

out_of_the_bluesays:

And Google bid only 4.4 BILLION on this for WHY?

To do the same thing. And that bidding skewers Google because obviously it knows the portfolio is relevant.

Disclaimer: I want to do away entirely with software patents. Working physical models only, just as the old days. — By the way: in fifteen years, Mike hasn’t made a single concrete proposal this area, either. And he’s only writing here because his precious Google is on the wrong end of this particular unfair business practice.


Economics is a non-science that makes fantasies to flatter plutocrats, an easy path to a degree for those who inherit, who remain willfully ignorant of the effects on laborers.

01:15:43[b-226-7]


[I see the kids are out early, stealing my valuable screen name. That’s why I have to defend it with the above time stamp. — And I’m pleased to do so! Shows my effect here, besides is fun to frustrate the ankle-biters! You haven’t ever run me off, kids.]

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: And Google bid only 4.4 BILLION on this for WHY?

Disclaimer: I want to do away entirely with software patents. Working physical models only, just as the old days. — By the way: in fifteen years, Mike hasn’t made a single concrete proposal this area, either.

How to shut up ootb. He keeps making this claim, and as soon as anyone points out that he’s full of shit he disappears. Just watch.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110819/14021115603/so-how-do-we-fix-patent-system.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/11245721156/some-thoughts-fixing-problems-patent-system.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120712/18322919680/judge-posner-mission-to-fix-patents-we-have-some-suggestions.shtml

Anonymoussays:

  1. Does anyone here seriously believe that Google has been sitting on its thumbs all this time blissfully ignorant of how various of these patents would be asserted? Google is many things (as are the other defendants), but stupid is not one of them.

    @. Troll? You cannot be serious! Has the definition of troll now been expanded to embrace companies that actually make, sell, and service things, but engage in a means for conducting litigation providing them a tactical advantage?

    3. Try and recapture some market share. The fact that companies using competing operating systems in the phone/tablet market should tell people something, namely the distinct possibility that the “Android” family of phone and tablet manufacturers may not have been playing by the “rules” of business. Use your own stuff and quit reaching over the transom to cherry pick that which suits your needs.

    It seems to me that the only purpose of this article is to once again regurgitate the deep seated animus here towards anything associated with copyright and patent law that involves the assertion of rights long ago created and recognized by law.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

“It seems to me that the only purpose of this article is to once again regurgitate the deep seated animus here towards anything associated with copyright and patent law that involves the assertion of rights long ago created and recognized by law.”

So, by your logic, before the civil war the north was wrong to have deep hatred towards slavery and the whole slavery system? Because you know, slavery was created and recognized by law centuries earlier, so the north clearly had ‘deep seated animus here towards anything associated with’ slavery.

Just because it’s the law and established doesn’t mean it’s morally right, and doesn’t mean it’s a good law that benefits the economy (as slavery and the copyright/patent system were both supposed to do).

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Can’t address the point made? Make up a point you can address!

No one put slavery and patents ‘on the same plane’ except your curious retort. What was said was that the logic you applied basically works out to ‘the law should never ever change or recognize it was wrong or allowed something grossly immoral to happen.’

Bob Robertsonsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Argument from Antiquity

Very well said, A.C.

The argument from antiquity is one used all the time.

There is also the problem of judging a program by the claims used to justify it, rather than by its actual results.

No matter how lofty and altruistic the claims made to justify Patent and Copyright, those claims cannot justify the awful results of the actual laws used to enact them.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

  1. Google knew that Nortel’s patents could be used against them and that is why they also bid on Nortel’s patents. Google also realized that it didn’t matter what they bid, because Rockstar would outbid them.

    2. When did Rockstar make, sell, and service things? They are by every definition, a troll.

    3. I don’t know who you are saying should try to recapture market share. I would say Microsoft, Apple, RIM, etc should be trying to recapture market share instead of throwing money at lawyers to do the work for them.

Anonymous Howardsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

This.

M$ and the gray fruit bought the patents, promising not to use it to litigate, but license it.
They circumvented this condition by passing the patents to a shell company.

It’d be interesting to see what the courts have to say about this.

Also: Fuck patents already. No productive and innovative company needs them to innovate.

Guardiansays:

time ot stop buying lawyers products

apple and micrcrap are no more software companies then any law firm now…all they see is lawsuit values and share prices…..

well fuck you fromthe rest of the planet

and how awful is that stupid looking windows 8
NO really grade 2 squares and 6 colors

apple without jobs = just a bunch a spoiled brat lawyers

dont care they sue google the nsa spy buddy, but hey apple and micro crap also are buds of the nsa , time to start leaking the nsa holes in your operating systems a little at a time much like a snowden release

Anonymoussays:

It’s time to do away with patents. They cause more harm than good, stifle innovation, and cause products and services to become unaffordable.

In other words, patents do the complete opposite of what their stated benefits are supposed to be. Which is increase innovation, as well as making health care and food more affordable.

The complete opposite!

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

I agree. and the same is true for govt. established broadcasting and cableco monopolies (for commercial or private use). The same is true for govt established taxi cab monopolies. I am sick and tired of government passing anti-competitive laws just because politicians want campaign contributions and revolving door favors. The revolving door problem has gotten completely out of control and our laws are not driven by what’s in the public interest but what’s in the interest of a few industry players. Look at, for instance, 95+ year copy protection lengths and retroactive extensions. Politicians should be jailed for passing laws just so that they can get revolving door favors in return. I’m sick and tired of it. NO MORE ANTI-COMPETITIVE LAWS!!!!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Report this ad??|??Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
12:25 Australian Privacy Commissioner Says 7-Eleven Broke Privacy Laws By Scanning Customers' Faces At Survey Kiosks (6)
10:50 Missouri Governor Doubles Down On 'View Source' Hacking Claim; PAC Now Fundraising Over This Bizarrely Stupid Claim (45)
10:45 Daily Deal: The All-in-One Microsoft, Cybersecurity, And Python Exam Prep Training Bundle (0)
09:43 Want To Understand Why U.S. Broadband Sucks? Look At Frontier Communications In Wisconsin, West Virginia (8)
05:36 Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group (71)
19:57 Le Tigre Sues Barry Mann To Stop Copyright Threats Over Song, Lights Barry Mann On Fire As Well (21)
16:07 Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment (15)
13:37 Two Years Later, Judge Finally Realizes That A CDN Provider Is Not Liable For Copyright Infringement On Websites (21)
12:19 Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate (158)
10:55 Verizon 'Visible' Wireless Accounts Hacked, Exploited To Buy New iPhones (8)
10:50 Daily Deal: The MacOS 11 Course (0)
07:55 Suing Social Media Sites Over Acts Of Terrorism Continues To Be A Losing Bet, As 11th Circuit Dumps Another Flawed Lawsuit (11)
02:51 Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is) (100)
19:51 Facebook AI Moderation Continues To Suck Because Moderation At Scale Is Impossible (26)
16:12 Content Moderation Case Studies: Snapchat Disables GIPHY Integration After Racist 'Sticker' Is Discovered (2018) (11)
13:54 Arlo Makes Live Customer Service A Luxury Option (8)
12:05 Delta Proudly Announces Its Participation In The DHS's Expanded Biometric Collection Program (5)
11:03 LinkedIn (Mostly) Exits China, Citing Escalating Demands For Censorship (14)
10:57 Daily Deal: The Python, Git, And YAML Bundle (0)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
06:41 Report: Client-Side Scanning Is An Insecure Nightmare Just Waiting To Be Exploited By Governments (35)
20:38 MLB In Talks To Offer Streaming For All Teams' Home Games In-Market Even Without A Cable Subscription (10)
15:55 Appeals Court Says Couple's Lawsuit Over Bogus Vehicle Forfeiture Can Continue (15)
13:30 Techdirt Podcast Episode 301: Scarcity, Abundance & NFTs (0)
12:03 Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist (66)
10:45 Introducing The Techdirt Insider Discord (4)
10:40 Daily Deal: The Dynamic 2021 DevOps Training Bundle (0)
09:29 Criminalizing Teens' Google Searches Is Just How The UK's Anti-Cybercrime Programs Roll (19)
06:29 Canon Sued For Disabling Printer Scanners When Devices Run Out Of Ink (41)
20:51 Copyright Law Discriminating Against The Blind Finally Struck Down By Court In South Africa (7)
More arrow