Trigger
Just (12/2/2013) read “Google’s Growing Patent Stockpile/The search giant says patents are rubbish. Yet it’s accumulating more of them than ever” in the MIT Technology Review.
“But data from the U.S. Patent & Trademark office shows that Google has been working very, very hard to win more patents on its own ideas. It has accelerated its activity to such a degree that Google inventors—among them founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page—are now winning 10 patents every day the patent office is open, covering everything from automated cars to balloon-based data networks. For comparison, consider that in all of 2003, Google was awarded four patents. … Google says it now controls more than 51,000 patents and patents pending.” (Emphasis added)
Google claims it is only for defensive purposes like the purchase of Motorola Mobility with a portfolio of 17,000 and more patents in 2012.
The article does not fail to mention “a typical smartphone could be covered by as many as 250,000 patents, but that, like most patents, they are “largely questionable” and for the most part “dubious.””.
Questionable And Dubious Inflation Of Patents
The above article also contains a chart showing how many patents per year are awarded to top IT companies in the U.S. by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office.
Can you believe that a company like IBM has about 6,000 innovations per year that deserve a patent? Or Microsoft about 3,000 per year?
Patentable is legally defined as a non-obvious novelty. Do all these patents meet these criteria or are they being granted too easily? I am afraid it is the latter.
Previous, Related Blog Posts
Here (this post contains links to other related posts of mine).
No comments:
Post a Comment