Google to buy Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion

[dinamic1]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/15/us-motorolamobility-google-idUSTRE77E1XF20110815

[Foxcow]

Hopefully, this results in unlocked bootloaders and more Nexu-like devices.

[koenn]

Google is probably more than anything else interested in Motorola's smartphone-related patents, which they could use as defense against patent law suits / threats against Android.

[Lucradia]

Google is probably more than anything else interested in Motorola's smartphone-related patents, which they could use as defense against patent law suits / threats against Android.

With what Apple's been doing? No.

[LowSky]

I'm wondering if Google will be able to keep the name Motorola Mobility?

As you all might remember Motorola split early this year, and Motorola Solutions is the other half. So does Google now own the red M logo too?

[PuddingKnife]

Here is a Q&A on the deal:

http://blogs.computerworld.com/18806/google_motorola_mobility?ref=fb

[Foobarz]

Larry Page: AWW YEAHHHHHH
Steve Jobs: Oh SHHHHHHHHHH
Steve Ballmer: Get Mark Zuckerberg on the line. . .

[Merk42]

Larry Page: AWW YEAHHHHHH
Steve Jobs: Oh SHHHHHHHHHH
Steve Ballmer: Get Mark Zuckerberg on the line. . .
Wouldn't Stephen Elop be a much more analogous person for Ballmer to call?

[zekopeko]

The ultimate troll would be for Apple to outbid Google and acquire Motorola. Then sue them for infringing Motorola's patents.

[Lucradia]

The ultimate troll would be for Apple to outbid Google and acquire Motorola. Then sue them for infringing Motorola's patents.

Nope... nope. Apple's already doing that to ALL android tablet makers (and touch-screen device makers), by acquiring patents for in-screen touch sensors, and other efficiency stuff. (These patents previously didn't exist due to the "commonplace" of the technology.)

[KiwiNZ]

It wont be long before these Forums a full of posts talking about the Evil Google:rolleyes:;)

[Lucradia]

It wont be long before these Forums a full of posts talking about the Evil Google:rolleyes:;)

...


Nope... nope. Apple's already doing that to ALL android tablet makers (and touch-screen device makers), by acquiring patents for in-screen touch sensors, and other efficiency stuff. (These patents previously didn't exist due to the "commonplace" of the technology.)

[SoFl W]

So many people on here like to spell Microsoft with a $ sign, can we start spelling Google as Goog£€ ?

[KiwiNZ]

So many people on here like to spell Microsoft with a $ sign, can we start spelling Google as Goog£€ ?

No to either

[Dr. C]

Google is probably more than anything else interested in Motorola's smartphone-related patents, which they could use as defense against patent law suits / threats against Android.

Or to deter litigation against Android. The principle is that if another company litigates against Android then they can unleash their patents against that company's products. The only trouble with this MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) deterrence is that it does not work against patent trolls.

[madjr]

nice sum up on phoronix:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTc5MQ

oh and microsoft was negotiating with motorola to also offer windows phone 7 phones.... guess that wont happen now :P

[akand074]

I'm pretty pumped for this. Motorola has a huge patent portfolio in the mobile/networking/etc realm (17,000+ and 7500 pending). This will definitely help defend them against patent trolling. Not to mention they now have a hardware manufacturer, which is really useful for helping in developing the software, though Motorola will still be run as a separate business.

I don't think anyone can come in and make a bigger bid, it's already been accepted by both board of directors (basically already decided) and pending approval from the courts. So basically it's too late. I don't think either Apple or Microsoft would even have interest in acquiring Motorola.

I'm excited to see Android come a years time, with Ice Cream Sandwich released and seeing how development goes from there.

[KiwiNZ]

Google shows that it is a patent troll to.

[PuddingKnife]

Google shows that it is a patent troll to.

Safeguarding against patent trolls is patent trolling? Huh. I learn something everyday.

[Aquix]

I'm wondering if this will protect linux too?

[PhillyPhil]

Google is probably more than anything else interested in Motorola's smartphone-related patents, which they could use as defense against patent law suits / threats against Android.

Definitely this. They probably don't really care about the hardware side much at all.


The ultimate troll would be for Apple to outbid Google and acquire Motorola. Then sue them for infringing Motorola's patents.

Yes, ultimate troll, but seeing as they're already suing Motorola I think it's unlikely.


It wont be long before these Forums a full of posts talking about the Evil Google:rolleyes:;)

Possible, but also unlikely. Google already has a large patent pool but has never used patents except in defense/retaliation, so there's no reason to think they'll change now.


Google shows that it is a patent troll too.

What? Where? Links please.
Too? Do you mean Apple is a patent troll?
Buying patents for defense is about as far removed from patent trolling as you can get.

[v1ad]

Whoooooo!!!!!! Google!!!!

[Bandit]

Safeguarding against patent trolls is patent trolling? Huh. I learn something everyday.
Sounds crazy, but its sad and true. If one has few patents they get stepped on in the courts left and right, but when one has many patents in to their defense, then they must step on others that would also step on them.

Its like a bunch of mad dogs in a junk yard. Constantly biting and fighting at each other, but when new young dog is introduced he has to grow up quick and start biting back to keep his turf.


So yea go stupid patent legal system!!

[PhillyPhil]

Sounds crazy, but its sad and true. If one has few patents they get stepped on in the courts left and right, but when one has many patents in to their defense, then they must step on others that would also step on them.

Its like a bunch of mad dogs in a junk yard. Constantly biting and fighting at each other, but when new young dog is introduced he has to grow up quick and start biting back to keep his turf.


So yea go stupid patent legal system!!

Pudding was being sarcastic.

I agree with your general feelings about the patents system, but using patents in defense doesn't require you to "step on others".
When part A sues party B for patents in A's pool, B retaliates by suing A for patents in B's pool, with the aim of forcing A to agree to a cross-licencing deal that ends both lawsuits.

[KiwiNZ]

What? Where? Links please.
Too? Do you mean Apple is a patent troll?
Buying patents for defense is about as far removed from patent trolling as you can get.

So it's OK for Google to have patents but not others? so you believe Google wont litigate? :rolleyes:

[Dr. C]

Google shows that it is a patent troll to.

What Google has done does not make it a patent troll nor does it safeguard it against patent trolls. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll

[KiwiNZ]

Safeguarding against patent trolls is patent trolling? Huh. I learn something everyday.

Buying patents is. Inventing something and applying for and being granted a patent now that is different.

[PhillyPhil]

So it's OK for Google to have patents but not others? so you believe Google wont litigate? :rolleyes:

You didn't answer any of my questions.
I don't have a problem with possession of patents (and I didn't say I did)

I think (I hope) Google will retaliate against companies that attack them first, with the goal of forcing cross-licencing deals.
I would be *extremely* surprised if Google were to sue first.

Now, as you seem to feel Apple and Google should be lumped together in the same category (I disagree) are they both good, or both bad?


Buying patents is. Inventing something and applying for and being granted a patent now that is different.

!!!
Buying patents is not trolling.
Your opinion raises some interesting paradoxes. For example: party A buy patents with the sole intent of supplementing their income by suing party B. So party B buys patents that can be used to force cross-licencing.
Would you really call B a troll? If so I guess you are in a very tiny minority.

[handy]

It wont be long before these Forums a full of posts talking about the Evil Google:rolleyes:;)

You are definitely a troll!

[KiwiNZ]

You didn't answer any of my questions.
I don't have a problem with possession of patents (and I didn't say I did)

I think (I hope) Google will retaliate against companies that attack them first, with the goal of forcing cross-licencing deals.
I would be *extremely* surprised if Google were to sue first.

Now, as you seem to feel Apple and Google should be lumped together in the same category (I disagree) are they both good, or both bad?

I have no issue with companies inventing,getting and defending patents. I have an issue with companies buying patents for litigation revenue streams.

Patents are for the protection of invention.

If one does not believe that Google are not doing this to obtain return on investment through litigation will no doubt also believe in the tooth fairy.

[akand074]

So it's OK for Google to have patents but not others? so you believe Google wont litigate? :rolleyes:

Google has never given any reason to believe they would litigate. Matter of fact, Google has always been pro patent reform, anti patent litigation. I'd imagine they would litigate only as a counter offensive. But we never know, now that they have a large patent portfolio, they might change (power corrupts as they say ;)). Even so, I don't think Google could possibly be anywhere near as bad as most companies in the same position as them.

[Dr. C]

Buying patents is. Inventing something and applying for and being granted a patent now that is different.

And this makes the Open Invention Network (http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/) and its Associate Member Canonical patent trolls? Buying patents for defense of one's own products or services is very far from patent trolling.

[PhillyPhil]

I have no issue with companies inventing,getting and defending patents. I have an issue with companies buying patents for litigation revenue streams.

Patents are for the protection of invention.

If one does not believe that Google are not doing this to obtain return on investment through litigation will no doubt also believe in the tooth fairy.

...!

Yes! They most certainly do hope to gain a return on investment, but not in the way you see.

You have to compare their future financial position if they don't have those patents for defense with their financial position if they do.
Without the patents Android (directly or indirectly through hardware) could possibly be badly hurt, and so be a severe blow to Google's income.
Spending $13b now to avoid that kind of financial damage is a wise move, and gives a good return on their investment. There's no need for them to be the aggressor (and I repeat, despite a large patent pool they have never yet been the aggressor).

[akand074]

Buying patents is. Inventing something and applying for and being granted a patent now that is different.

And to second what the post above me has said, applying for a patent can even be a troll. Because this (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/apples-eu-legal-win-could-prevent-all-oems-from-building-tablets/14175) design patent is the biggest troll of all!

[KiwiNZ]

I do not believe that Google is on some altruistic endevour.

[madjr]

and to second what the post above me has said, applying for a patent can even be a troll. Because this (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/apples-eu-legal-win-could-prevent-all-oems-from-building-tablets/14175) design patent is the biggest troll of all!

+1

[aysiu]

I do not believe that Google is on some altruistic endevour.
So a company is either altruistic or a patent troll? False dichotomy, KiwiNZ!

[PuddingKnife]

Buying patents is. Inventing something and applying for and being granted a patent now that is different.

I patently disagree. Kiwi, you stated that Google are patent trolls, then you stated that you believe Google will be patent trolls. I believe that you have a bias, and it is showing.

[KiwiNZ]

So a company is either altruistic or a patent troll? False dichotomy, KiwiNZ!

I think I said they not altruistic, I also said I believe they are a patent troll ( I actually hate thet term, but thats a different story). A patent troll by popular definition is not atruistic so I not sure where the falseness lays. I may not be seeing it as I have been awake for two days.

[KiwiNZ]

I patently disagree. Kiwi, you stated that Google are patent trolls, then you stated that you believe Google will be patent trolls. I believe that you have a bias, and it is showing.

I have no bias, I dislike patent purchasing be it Apple, MSFT, Google or Canonical. I belive that patents should be for the inventor only.

[Linye]

KiwiNZ is always trolling against anything that could hurt apple.

[PuddingKnife]

Like I said, I disagree, but fair enough.

[KiwiNZ]

KiwiNZ is always trolling against anything that could hurt apple.

Read post #40 and comprehend;)

[akand074]

Don't lose too much sleep over KiwiNZ. I've noticed he has a natural devils advocacy. That leads to pretty interesting/enjoyable arguments. I for one, get slightly excited when I see him join a conversation.

Although I do agree with you KiwiNZ in regards to patent purchasing, and that patents should be made by inventors. I think the whole patent system is garbage and patents have no value. It's like money, the more there is in the economy, the less it's worth. Basically, the fact that you can patent just about anything, including the most mundane things and then use them aggressively against others is ridiculous. There is what? over 10 million patents! Is there really 10 million things that are so impressive that they deserve to be patented and reserved for that maker. I've talked to people from Universities around the country in computer science who were laughing at the fact that Apple had been suing companies over something they learned in their first year. Point is, I think there should probably only be around like... 1000 patents right now. And these are 1000 legit high quality innovations that not anyone could have done even if they put time toward it. Those are things that are quality to be patented, something someone else can not/hasn't been able to do whilst trying to. Not small lines of code and "ideas", or anything that anyone can do had they bothered putting time for it. Even designs, there is already copyright for that. But if they insist on letting anyone patent anything like they are now, they should only be reserved for them for a year or so just to give them the competitive advantage (i.e no one else can use that without a license for the given time, then they can develop their own code for it if they are able to). Not 20 years! Just how I see it. To me, anything that slows/damages/disallows innovation is a crime against humanity.

[Ric_NYC]

nice sum up on phoronix:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=otc5mq

oh and microsoft was negotiating with motorola to also offer windows phone 7 phones.... Guess that wont happen now :p

ahahahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahaha....

[Ric_NYC]

I think it was a good move.

Microsoft and Apple will think twice before taking "Android" to court.


No duopoly. Competition is good.

[KiwiNZ]

Tech Corporations do their best work when they do what they do best, create good devices and software, e.g iMac, iPad, Android, Windows 7, Samsung Galaxy, Acer Iconia, Tivo I wont go on but you get my point.

I wish they would drop all this patent litigation and purchasing and get on with developing great products.

[MooPi]

Google shows that it is a patent troll to.

Who is Google suing ?

[akand074]

Tech Corporations do their best work when they do what they do best, create good devices and software, e.g iMac, iPad, Android, Windows 7, Samsung Galaxy, Acer Iconia, Tivo I wont go on but you get my point.

I wish they would drop all this patent litigation and purchasing and get on with developing great products.

Agreed.

[MooPi]

Tech Corporations do their best work when they do what they do best, create good devices and software, e.g iMac, iPad, Android, Windows 7, Samsung Galaxy, Acer Iconia, Tivo I wont go on but you get my point.

I wish they would drop all this patent litigation and purchasing and get on with developing great products.

Agreed. The age of patent litigation should end before long any way because it is becoming obvious to all in the tech industry that the system is horribly flawed and being manipulated and warped for the purpose of greed at the expense of technological advances.

[PhillyPhil]

I do not believe that Google is on some altruistic endevour.

Definitely not altruistic!
They buy patents to protect their bottom line, obviously, but the difference is they don't use patents aggressively, they use them defensively only, which is commendable IMHO.


I have no bias, I dislike patent purchasing be it Apple, MSFT, Google or Canonical. I belive that patents should be for the inventor only.

Well, at least that is some admirable consistency (no sarcasm).
This statement aside though, you do have a severe bias when it come to Apple! Has been showing for a looong time....


I wish they would drop all this patent litigation and purchasing and get on with developing great products.
This I wholeheartedly agree with.

[KiwiNZ]

,.........you do have a severe bias when it come to Apple! Has been showing for a looong time....

.

I do not have a bias, if I like what a company is doing, be it Apple, MSFT, Google or Cocoa Cola I have the freedom to say so and generally will not hold back.

[uRock]

Makes me want to invest in both Apple and Google. I like good competition.

[KiwiNZ]

Makes me want to invest in both Apple and Google. I like good competition.

I sold my Apple shares

[uRock]

I sold my Apple shares

Hopefully, I will get my chance to say that with a smile some day :D

[ScionicSpectre]

I'd rather the company that publicly and aggressively supports open standards and open web frameworks be the patent troll than someone who wants to kill the competition entirely. I mean, you could argue there's nothing keeping Google from doing so, but so far as I've seen, even if Google is a bit shoddy releasing the source for Android in a timely manner, they still do, and everyone is still free to take Android and make it into whatever they want at this point.

So I'm definitely happier about this than most of the patent-related news I've been hearing lately. The worst Google does is shove ads in our faces and keep some of its web-related software closed, for obvious reasons. I mean, they don't force you into anything but advertisements. When that's the big bad deed of the company, I'm sure you have other corporations to worry about. Of all the big companies out there, Google tends to be an ardent supporter of open formats, software, and publishing information and software as widely as possible. They are the guys that explicitly support Linux in almost everything they do.

So yeah, while it's not a perfect world, and a perfect Google would be hard to conceive of, I think we're better off with them having some way to defend our rights to pay nothing for their free software. I'm just sick of all this bullying- no one's charging licensing fees for Firefox, stop doing it with Android. :C Yooz makin' me all shad-like.

[AllRadioisDead]

I'd rather the company that publicly and aggressively supports open standards and open web frameworks be the patent troll than someone who wants to kill the competition entirely. I mean, you could argue there's nothing keeping Google from doing so, but so far as I've seen, even if Google is a bit shoddy releasing the source for Android in a timely manner, they still do, and everyone is still free to take Android and make it into whatever they want at this point.

So I'm definitely happier about this than most of the patent-related news I've been hearing lately. The worst Google does is shove ads in our faces and keep some of its web-related software closed, for obvious reasons. I mean, they don't force you into anything but advertisements. When that's the big bad deed of the company, I'm sure you have other corporations to worry about. Of all the big companies out there, Google tends to be an ardent supporter of open formats, software, and publishing information and software as widely as possible. They are the guys that explicitly support Linux in almost everything they do.

So yeah, while it's not a perfect world, and a perfect Google would be hard to conceive of, I think we're better off with them having some way to defend our rights to pay nothing for their free software. I'm just sick of all this bullying- no one's charging licensing fees for Firefox, stop doing it with Android. :C Yooz makin' me all shad-like.

I agree with you for the most part, however:
Google hasn't been doing anything shoddy with the source code of Android. They openly admitted that they weren't releasing the source code for Honeycomb because Honeycomb was entirely optimized for tablets. It would ruin the user experience if it was ported to other devices such as phones. If they released the source code for Honeycomb, it would be treated as a version up from Gingerbread. While it technically is, it's more of a seperate "branch" of Android developed for Tablets. These two branches will be combined into one unified operating system to run on all devices in a couple of months when Google outs the next version of Android, Ice Cream Sandwich. They also promised that the source code would be released.

Honeycomb was developed for a very specific set of hardware requirements. Take a look here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Gingerbread-Honeycomb-Ice-Cream-Sandwich-UI-dpi-tweak,12787.html

[Oxwivi]

I don't like the patent buying/selling crap either, but as long as it is not used against other's innovation, it doesn't matter. If it helps keep Android open, then Google buying the patents is protecting innovation.

Then there's also the possibility of Google releasing select patents in some sort of permissive license to protect OEMs in general. That is not patent trolling in any way. Most pro-innovation patent move, it is.

[neu5eeCh]

[2 Cents] Google had to do this. They had no choice, at least not if they wanted Android to succeed. Apple & Microsoft were merrily suing Android out of existence with trivial Patent lawsuits and all to leverage their own software.

If I were Google, I would use my new Patents to sue every company that uses Windows. I would use the same strategy of FUD that MS uses: If you use Windows, you are violating our patents. Companies have demonstrated that they will settle rather than fight even trivial lawsuits. I would use precisely the same tactics as MS - non-disclosure agreements and all the rest. That would p--s Balmer off.

I would find ways to sue Apple, and sue and sue and sue and sue.

The point is not to start a Patent war (which is already here) but to force MS and Apple to back off and compete in the market of ideas rather than patents. If not that, then something has got to break. You don't stop bullies until you start hitting back, and harder. [/2 Cents]

[JDShu]

Google will not be the first to sue in any patent situation. This is not merely for altruistic reasons. Google markets itself with it's "don't be evil" rhetoric. As a result, it now employs many talented engineers who forego working at other companies because they agree with it. As a result, if Google asserted patents aggressively, they immediately lose some of their best engineers. People that probably hold top positions. The value of a tech company is primarily it's human capital, or "talent". Therefore, suing for patent infringement would incur a huge and avoidable cost on Google.

[HappinessNow]

The ultimate troll would be for Apple to outbid Google and acquire Motorola. Then sue them for infringing Motorola's patents.

Not JUST Apple but the Axis of Evil (The Apple/Microsoft/Oracle Consortium).

[HappinessNow]

I have no issue with companies inventing,getting and defending patents. I have an issue with companies buying patents for litigation revenue streams.

Patents are for the protection of invention.

If one does not believe that Google are not doing this to obtain return on investment through litigation will no doubt also believe in the tooth fairy.so with that logic you should have a problem with Apple/Microsoft/Oracle consortium.

reference:


Google's top lawyer accused Apple, Oracle, Microsoft and other companies on Wednesday of using "bogus patents" to wage a campaign against the Internet giant's Android mobile platform.

In a blog post, Google senior vice president and chief legal officer David Drummond said Google's rivals were seeking to "make it harder for manufacturers to sell Android devices."

"Instead of competing by building new features or devices, they are fighting through litigation," Drummond said.

He said 550,000 Android devices were being activated every day and its success has resulted in a "hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple and other companies, waged through bogus patents."

Drummond pointed to last year's $450 million acquisition of 882 patents from software maker Novell by a consortium made up Microsoft, Apple, EMC and Oracle and the more recent purchase by a group led by Apple and Microsoft of 6,000 patents held by bankrupt Canadian firm Nortel.

Google was a bidder for the Nortel patent portfolio but it lost out to a $4.5 billion bid from the consortium made up of iPhone maker Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, Blackberry maker Research in Motion and Japan's Sony.

The huge sum spent on the patents and the involvement of many of the world's top tech companies reflected the fierce battle for intellectual property in the tech industry, where firms are often hit with patent-infringement lawsuits.

Google is currently being sued by software giant Oracle over technology used in its Android smartphone operating system.

Drummond said Google's rivals were "banding together" and were seeking a $15 licensing fee for every Android device.

He said they were also "attempting to make it more expensive for phone manufacturers to license Android," which Google provides for free to handset makers.

"Patents were meant to encourage innovation, but lately they are being used as a weapon to stop it," Drummond said.

"A smartphone might involve as many as 250,000 (largely questionable) patent claims, and our competitors want to impose a 'tax' for these dubious patents that makes Android devices more expensive for consumers.

"Fortunately, the law frowns on the accumulation of dubious patents for anti-competitive means -- which means these deals are likely to draw regulatory scrutiny, and this patent bubble will pop," he continued.

Drummond said Google was encouraged that the US Justice Department is looking into whether Microsoft and Apple acquired the Nortel patents for "anti-competitive means."

"We're also looking at other ways to reduce the anti-competitive threats against Android by strengthening our own patent portfolio," he said. "We're determined to preserve Android as a competitive choice for consumers, by stopping those who are trying to strangle it."

Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith responded to the Google accusations with a message on his Twitter feed.

"Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no," Smith said.

Apple or Oracle did not immediately respond to requests for comment.http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/business/tech-biz/08/04/11/google-lawyer-slams-apple-microsoft-over-patents

KiwiNZ what you are falsely accusing Google of POTENTIALLY doing in the future is exactly what APPLE, MICROSOFT, ORACLE and others are CURRENTLY DOING NOW!

[Ric_NYC]

Not JUST Apple but the Axis of Evil (The Apple/Microsoft/Oracle Consortium).

I like that definition.