Posts Tagged: "Google"

A federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas returned a verdict on Saturday, January 18, 2014, following a week-long trial presided over by the Honorable Rodney Gilstrap, that found that Google infringed SimpleAir’s U.S. Patent No. 7,035,914. The services accused of infringing the ‘914 patent were the Google Cloud Messaging (GCM) and Android Cloud to Device Messaging (C2DM) services. Those services are used by Google to process and send instant notifications for Android applications, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Gmail. The damages issue will be decided by a separate jury in a second trial limited to the issue of damages. SimpleAir has announced that they will seek damages in excess of $125 million for Google’s infringement in the damages retrial.

This is likely a signal of more patent infringement lawsuits yet to come in the growing patent battle by proxy between Google (NASDAQ: GOOG), Samsung, HTC (TPE: 2498) and the companies behind Rockstar, which is a group created by Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL), Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT), BlackBerry Ltd.(NASDAQ: BBRY), Ericsson AB and Sony Corp. (NYSE: SNE) to acquire patents from Nortel Networks Corp. in 2011.

Even as more of us are becoming acquainted with the idea of the cloud, many of us are still woefully ignorant of what the term actually means. For example, a survey by cloud software developer Citrix Systems showed that 54 percent of respondents did not believe that they used cloud-based computing, even though 95 percent of them actually did. Almost as many respondents confused the cloud metaphor, believing that stormy weather could actually interfere with cloud systems. Cloud computing is set to take a much more prominent role in our technologically savvy society. Providing advanced computing applications through networking channels severely reduces the IT needs of homes and businesses who want to use more powerful software programs without installing them on a client computer. With more than $131 billion in economic activity for the cloud computing sector in 2013, more business infrastructure and software services should be taking to the cloud than ever before.

So can we stop pretending that Google isn’t like every other user of the patent system? They are not Snow White. They are not the Mother Teresa of patents. Google seeks broad, sometimes nearly ridiculously broad, patent claims must like everyone else. Yet to listen to them they would have you, and Members of Congress and the media, believe that they are the only altruistic actor and impartial voice in the patent debate. They criticize other companies, but their own practices are no different. I have no problem with Google seeking this or any other patent, but can we stop pretending that Google is somehow different than other technology companies and a true defender of a patent-less world? They pursue patents of all varieties that they think they can obtain, including patents on an electronic skin tattoo capable of being applied to the throat region of the body of a wearer.

We profile one patent application that seeks to converge content from social networks with the news feed that a person sees when browsing a news aggregator service. Google wants to patent a system that analyzes a user’s social media feeds to pull up relevant media or comments that may enhance the value of browsing through news stories. Other patent applications protect better routing systems, both for public transportation as well as personal vehicles, and one discusses an interesting system of providing instant text translations between two foreign parties on one tablet computer. In the section regarding the patents issued recently to Google, we’ve found a few interesting improvements to online digital technologies, especially those meant to help digital rights owners and legal teams. One patent protects a system of identifying a copyrighted composition by analyzing the melody of a live recording, while another provides a more cost-effective process of electronic discovery of legal documents. More routing services are protected by other Google patents that we discuss here, showing Google is actively seeking to expand its holdings in online mapping applications.

Tech sector giants have been crying and moaning about how the patent system has run amok and needs to be scaled back, and continually beg for patent reform that would gut the patent system and weaken patent rights… Even mighty Microsoft couldn’t maintain their monopoly, and only the foolish would anticipate Google, Facebook and other tech giants to be on top indefinitely. That isn’t how the tech sector works, or is intended to work. But if a vibrant, robust and strong patent system is not there for start-ups today they will never become the giant, innovation shifting, growth companies of the future. That would be terrible for the economy, lead to stagnant innovation and guarantee that slothful, giant companies that have lost the ability to innovate would remain dominant rather than going the way of the dinosaur.

Notwithstanding Google’s Jekyll and Hyde approach to patents, Figure 14 together with the associated textual discussion is extremely interesting because it shows rather conclusively that “software” isn’t really all that “soft.” Even many so-called math experts and mathematicians refuse to acknowledge what is really happening on the basic level within a computer when “soft”—ware is being used, instead preferring to pretend that it has to do with basic math rather than manipulation of logic gates and switches. We can complain and lament their lack of understanding if it makes us feel better, but in the meantime we need to realize that their ignorance with respect to what is really occurring is having an enormously negative impact on the future of software patentability.

A few of the patent applications from Google we’re looking at today focus on improvements to mobile devices of various kinds. One patent application would protect a system of improving security measures for a portable device based on the device’s actual location. Another application would aid the image capture process on a mobile device based on the user’s field of vision. Other patent documents we feature discuss improvements created by applied computer analysis of various network data. One patent application filed by Google would allow users to monetize pictures that they share on social networks. We also explore a patent application that gives advertisers better insight into the demographics of a certain television show’s audience. But the reference that was by far the most eye-catching was an issued patent that gives Google the right to protect a system of paying tax for the recipient of a gift card, instead of that tax being applied to the recipient’s purchases.

A number of interesting patent applications deal with Google’s efforts to improve online mapping applications. One such application would protect a system of downloading map tiles for offline routing. An issued patent assigned to Google protects a system of depicting multi-level buildings three-dimensionally so that browsers can view flooring plans. Other USPTO activity showcases Google’s focus on creating better media systems for mobile devices. One patent application would protect a system of synchronizing magazine content on apps for better layout among different devices. Another patent application allows users to selectively view images to conserve data usage. Finally, we look at a patent application filed to protect a system of ranking news articles based on the source publication’s quality.

Copyright is important in all forms of media because it provides legal ownership over the work someone produces. This allows the author, artist, etc. control over how their work is used. Without copyright laws, content could be stolen from one creator and used by someone else; thus, a profit could be made by someone other than the creator from content that they put no effort into. Since it is the copyright holder’s responsibility to ensure that a copyright has not been infringed upon, it is vital to keep a close eye on your content and how it is used by others on the internet.

As the developer of the Android mobile device software, Google is heavily involved with mobile device and digital media systems development. Two recent patent applications filed by Google would protect different innovations for Internet audio systems, including a user-responsive start page for a music library and a system of allowing multiple users to rate tracks on a playlist to adjust playback. Google is also focused on improving online search methods, as is evidenced by another patent application for a system of searching social media pages for individuals or groups. And another final patent application would protect a more secure system of offering digital media excerpts to potential customers which would prevent stealing.

The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) recently announced that it is joining the other cast of characters who have filed a class action complaint against Google, claiming (as the other plaintiffs have) that Google’s “Google Book Search” program violates the copyrights of several photographers and visual artists. The other plaintiffs include individuals Leif Skoogfors, Al Satterwhite, Morton Beebe, Ed Kashi, John Schmelzer, Simms Taback and Gail Kuenstler Living Trust, Leland Bobbe, John Francis Ficara and David Moser, and associations The American Society of Media Photographers, the Graphic Artists Guild, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photography Association, the Professional Photographers of America, and American Photographic Artists.

Late yesterday I was contacted via telephone by a representative of Google about my article titled Is Patent Litigation Really a Problem for Big Tech? I was told during that telephone conversation that I misunderstood what Suzanne Michel said during the symposium at American University. I was also told that Google does not sell patents to patent trolls, although other big tech companies do, which concerns Google. Google has asked for a retraction. I am not entirely comfortable with a retraction because I think my interpretation of what Michel said was fair, although I’m willing to accept Google at face value when they tell me that they do not sell to patent trolls.