The fight between your two tech titans has once more leaking into public take on Twitter, this time around over mobile patents.
It began Wednesday, when David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer,authored your blog publish that accused Microsoft, Apple along with other companies of attempting to consider lower Google's Android operating-system by fighting a patent war. The businesses beat Google inside a bid to purchase Nortel's patents recently and therefore are now purchasing Novell's patents.
Android's success, Mr. Drummond authored, has produced "a hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple along with other companies, fought through bogus patents."
"Patents were designed to encourage innovation, but recently you have used them like a weapon to prevent it," he authored.
But that is not quite true, Microsoft was quick to indicate. Kaira Cruz, Microsoft's general counsel, required to Twitter to express Microsoft requested Google to become listed on it in putting in a bid about the Novell patents but Google rejected.
"Google states we bought Novell patents to ensure that they're from Google, Mr. Cruz authored. "Really? We requested these phones bid collectively around. They stated no."
Then Frank X. Shaw, Microsoft's mind of corporate communications, that has been recognized to pick fights with Google on Twitter, became a member of in. He published a polite e-mail message from Google's general counsel, Kent Master, to Microsoft's Mr. Cruz decreasing to become listed on Microsoft inside a bid for Novell's patents,supported with this note: "Free advice for David Drummond ?§C the next time seek advice from Kent Master before you decide to blog. :)."
Late Thursday, Mr. Drummond added an update to his blog publish.
"Some pot purchase of the Novell patents that gave both sides a license might have removed any protection these patents could offer to Android against attacks from Microsoft and it is putting in a bid partners," he authored. "Ensuring we'd be not able to say these patents to protect Android ?a and getting us purchase the privilege ?a should have appeared as an ingenious technique to them. We did not fall for this."
Mr. Shaw immediately fired back on Twitter, stating that by not joining Microsoft inside a bid for that Novell patents, Google was doing the alternative of the items it stated to do ?a purchasing patents for defense, not offense. "They wished to buy something they can use to say against another person," he authored in a single. "Joining up with other people & reducing patent liability across market is not something they desired to help do," the next stated.
Patent lawyers who're not involved in these instances stated they frequently advise clients to prevent joint contracts for patents simply because they can render the patents meaningless unless of course all of the patents' proprietors agree on a single strategy.
For example, if Google and Microsoft collectively own a patent and a 3rd party really wants to sue Google, Microsoft could theoretically license that patent towards the 3rd party and Google would lose its defense against that patent.
Mr. Drummond's rant is across the same lines because the one Mr. Master made when he introduced that Google was putting in a bid $900 million on Nortel's patents, less for that technology regarding safeguard against frivolous patent legal cases.
That is still an enormous problem within the tech world. But for the time being, attention continues to be diverted to Microsoft and Google's tit for tat. We'll see who lobs the following attack.
