Secretly working with the CIA? Quietly and actively doing DNA research? What kind of clandestine operation is this? Why, it's everybody's favorite search engine, Google.
If you have not seen the video, Google's Master Plan yet, it is a short clip that is long on implications. Its creators even have a web site, masterplanthemovie.com with the heading on the site, "Master Plan. About the power of Google."
This video and the site are well done and worth a peek if you happen to be one of those sentries who are concerned about uncontrolled, omnipotent power. If you, however, are quite content with all your free stuff from the search giant, and do not want to be bothered by another voice crying, "Wolf!" well, go ahead, move along; there's nothing to see here. But don't forget the meaning behind the western proverb that says, "Nothing is free."
The content on the site and video is obviously the brainchild of of some fellow watchers who are doing the math, an endeavor that many have blissfully ignored lest it get in the way of all the 'free,' convenient gadgets...
For you see, the following conversation was heard Once Upon a Time:
"What harm can come from Google simply scanning my emails? Why is it a problem if Google puts spyware, er, tracking cookies on my hard drive?"
You are correct, now, Gulliver, for what can a harmless little strand of tiny little rope possibly do to you? You are free, and strong, and surely can easily break free from its simple hold. Why, you should just sit back and enjoy the gifts we have given you.
"So what if Google can read my docs and spreadsheets? Who cares if Google monitors and records my search history?"
Exactly, Mr. Gulliver. There is no threat here at all. Why, we're enjoying this as much as you are. Never mind all the ropes we are carrying, we just want to be prepared for anything. It is all just part of the process to make us feel secure. We are cooperating with you, you are cooperating with us, we are working together to help each other out. Now raise your arm a little so we can tie a tiny little knot. There. That wasn't bad at all, was it?
"And my Google phone, with its gps ability, why, that is extremely helpful, is it not? They just found a missing lady in Washington using her cell phone's position to find her. Is not the future glorious?"
Why, yes, Gulliver, the future indeed is glorious, and surely it has arrived. And you are most deserving of all of its benefits. Why, if you will just extend your other arm out, to over there near that rock, and keep it still, we will put some more free stuff in your hand. It is really cool stuff that can work with all of the other things we have given you. But you must hold it still.
"And Google Earth, my goodness. I can see my house from there! Heh-heh, I can also see my neighbor's. They sure do have a messy back yard. And their back gate seems to be broken."
Oh, Gulliver, that is pretty sly of you to peek over the hedge without even having to step away from your computer! Say, would you like a pillow for your head?
"And so Google is going to customize my search results based on what my interests are, what I have searched for before, what web sites I visit and what my emails and docs are all about?"
Why, yes, all of it will be designed just for you. It will be individualized to fit your very tastes, wrapped, as it were, as a gift personally to you, the great Gulliver!
"That is fantastic. I cannot wait to use all of these things. They will be so helpful. Say, what are you wrapping around my legs and my feet?"
Oh, nothing serious, Mr. Gulliver. You do trust us, do you not? Why, we have given you so many nice things, is that not an indication of our kind intentions and good will? Oh, have you seen the new Presentations ability in Google Docs? It is fantastic! And you can run it remotely!
"Really? You mean like Power Point? And others can collaborate with me and help me set it up? Wow, that will make things so much easier!"
We are only thinking about you, Mr. Gulliver, and we are doing this all for you.
"Wow, that is really nice of you. I feel, well, I feel indebted for all you have done for me to help make my life easier. By the way, who is that man in the tan trench coat coming over here? Is that Fantomaster?"
No, it is not Fantomaster, for Fantomaster's trench coat is invisible. Whenever he comes over, nobody sees him. This guy coming over here now, he is nobody. Jut a consultant. You can call him Mr. Langely, he is from Virginia.
"What is he carrying? And why are all of your helpers rolling up my sleeve?"
Mr. Langely is bringing a needle here so that we can take a very tiny sample of your blood. You might have a genetic disease that has not manifested itself yet, and we want the very best for you, so if we find something known to be harmful, we will let you know immediately, and your doctor too.
"That is so thoughtful and kind of you! How forward-thinking! Can you take a sample from my daughter and my son as well? Here, I want to show you their pictures, they are in my wallet, but... I... can't... seem to move at all to be able to reach it!"
Do not worry, Mr. Gulliver, there is no need for you to be able to move. We have thought of everything. As for your children, we already know who they are. And as for your wallet, our people know exactly how to get that out of your pocket and we are bringing things that you like to buy right here in front of you to see. In fact, we can buy them for you if you would like.
"You mean I can just lay here and you will handle everything?"
Yes, Mr. Gulliver. Close your eyes and take a little nap. We have everything under control.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Thursday, September 13, 2007
All Your Content Are Belong To Us
So there I am sitting around minding my own business. I happen to glance at Google's Propaganda Assault blog (sometimes referred to as their Public Policy blog). I had no ax to grind. I'm not looking for a fight. Just checking things out and drinking some dark roast.
But all of a sudden, as I'm reading along, I realize that someone is pitching manure at me. Loads of it. What the heck is this? I wonder. Why is someone pitching this stuff at me? I'm not even aware that there is an issue or a controversy here. But I figure that if someone is going through the trouble to pitch this much manure my direction, it must be either to build a wall so I can't see what they are doing or a fortress for themselves that they can defend. And you know what? I don't like getting manure pitched at me.
So I put my special bs glasses on ( I was a boy scout, you see) and begin to wade through what is before me.
First of all, I read this: "Millions of people use Google’s search engine every day but don't realize that the balance inherent in U.S. copyright law helps enable it to exist. Here at Google, we strongly support the intellectual property rights of content creators and the protection of copyright. We think creators deserve to be rewarded for their work, and support the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity."
What is this stuff? I ask. But then through my special bs glasses I begin to see some themes. The first pitchfork of manure, "Millions of people use Google’s search engine every day but don't realize that the balance inherent in U.S. copyright law helps enable it to exist," is saying that what is to follow applies to all of us; in other words, it is attempting to get us to believe that it is in our own individual best-interest to support whatever balance is required for us to enjoy searching on Google. But it also says that whatever balance it intends to discuss is itself supported by US copyright law. And more than being supported by US law, the fact that the Google spinbot (writer) is actually invoking the law as a foundation upon which to make its coming argument, reveals the nature of the the real issue in the spin to follow.
OK, so what are they saying so far? They are saying Google is a good thing; the copyright law is a good thing and balance is a good thing. Alright. Sock it to me...(some free retro for ya.)
Then comes the second pitchfork of manure hurled at me: "Here at Google, we strongly support the intellectual property rights of content creators and the protection of copyright. We think creators deserve to be rewarded for their work, and support the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity." Ahh. Feigned support with the obligatory twist. They say they support: 1.) intellectual property rights of the content creator; 2.) the protection of copyright; 3.) reward to the deserving [content] creator; all fine and good; typical patronization. But what is the fourth concept that they support? 4.) the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity. Here again is that balance-of-copyright-law plea. This is the twist. This is the portal wherein Google wants to make an inroad, wedge its way in and stake a claim.
But why? What is motivating Google to even bring this up? Why throw manure into a perfectly good cup of coffee? What do they have on their Googagenda that necessitates this discussion?
Let's see if another mouthful of pitched manure gives us any indication: "While protecting the rights of creators, the Constitution and the courts place limits on the rights of copyright holders." OK, I see. Google is conceding that [content] creators have rights of protection. They say creators indeed have rights, BUT there are LIMITS to those rights. Not only are there limits, but the CONSTITUTION and the COURTS themselves have placed limits on [content] copyright holders. Oh, my. Where do I begin? Let me first of all confess that I am somewhat bewildered at Google's sudden patriotism. Why, all of a sudden they are hiding behind the Constitution of the very country who's laws they are trying to change regarding immigration so that more foreign nationals, who, unlike ordinary Americans, are qualified to work for Google, may get into this country. Let's make up our mind, Google; is this country restrictive to you or is it protective? I thought you loathed the laws of the US. Now you want to hide behind them? (Did someone forget to take their Riddilin today?)
But more than a fickle citation of Constitutional authority, herein we see the place where Google intends to drive its nail to stake its claim. It's all about LIMITATIONS of copyright protection. Yes, Google intends to build upon this foundation. (Kinda figures that with that much manure pitched, eventually the spinbot would have a big enough hole wherein to start to lay a foundation for a fortress...)
So naturally, Google brings forth a witness on this staked claim, "For example, copyright laws encourage others to make use of content in limited ways without seeking anyone's permission through the doctrine of "fair use." Yes, you see, there is precedent for using the content of others without their specific permission. But more than protected tendency, Google then takes it a step further to being an absolute right: "By enabling journalists, scholars and the general public to quote from and comment on others' writings, the fair use doctrine underscores basic rights of free expression." OK, so fair use enables people to quote from and comment on other people's copyrighted work. I myself am doing as much right here and now.
But it is at this point that a mystery begins to develop. Usually around this time in one of their spins, after a foundation has been laid and a fortress constructed, the Google spinbot will launch a diatribe at a particular enemy (concept, value, idea, law, roadblock, etc.) This time, however, while (assuming to be) possessing solid ground, instead of hurling an offensive, Google uncharacteristically decides, rather, to paint its walls!
Have a look at the next paragraph, "Fair use also assures that technological innovations such as the Internet itself can operate without violating copyright law. For instance, Google crawls the web, analyzes and indexes its content and makes a copy of each page on our servers. Our index is made up of the content of every web page which is crawled, optimized and stored in a variety of locations all over the world, to deliver results to users in a fraction of a second. In this way, we provide an opportunity for content creators to promote and capitalize on their creativity." Why the indulgence? Why the crayons and baby-steps? What flag is Google trying to wave?
But it does not stop there. Suddenly the national economic benefit card is played: "We've known for a while that fair use has allowed entire new industries and companies to grow, and to bring beneficial new services and innovative devices to consumers. Now, an interesting new study released yesterday by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (of which Google is a member) attempts to quantify the contribution of industries relying on fair use to the economy."
In spades: "The study -- which I encourage you to check out -- concludes that the "fair use economy" in 2006 accounted for $4.6 trillion in revenues (roughly one-sixth of total U.S. gross domestic product), employed more than 17 million people, and supported a payroll of $1.2 trillion (approximately one out of every eight workers in the US). It also generated $194 billion in exports and significant productivity growth. Using a methodology similar to a previous World Intellectual Property Organization guide, the results of the study demonstrate that fair use is an important economic driver in the digital age."
Alright, I do not know who the intended target is for this little vignette that Google has conjured up. It could be aimed at the US copyright laws. Having staked a claim, built a foundation, a fortress, and painted it, it could be that Google will use this preamble as the basis for a direct assault on DC later on. If that is the case, expect an upcoming battle against content copyright laws from Google's free use camp. And notice that Google will stretch the term, 'fair use' into 'advantageous use.' (With the advantage going to Google, of course, not to the content creator.) And also notice that were this same principle applied to PATENT laws, then this wonderful song and dance Google is performing spins completely the opposite direction. Isn't that interesting?!
Or, the target could be some countries in Europe where Google has run up against some (gasp!) obstacles. Why else would they hang out that economic carrot?
But either way, the spindar (spin-radar) is beeping loudly and it is crystal clear that the object of Google's spin here, is: CONTENT. Whether it be more liberal access to and use of American material or an attempted seduction of 'problematic' European administrations, here is what Google wants: "All Your Content Are Belong To Us."
Where they have it they want more. Where they have more they want full use of. It is in the public's own best interest; it is in the name of balance; it is to promote creativity; it is in the Constitution; it is in the law; it is a right!
And where they do not have it, this fortress they built in their blog post is nothing more than a common cat house: 'You, too, could add $4.6 trillion to your economy if you would just let All Your Content Are Belong To Us.'
Horse manure. Definitely.
But all of a sudden, as I'm reading along, I realize that someone is pitching manure at me. Loads of it. What the heck is this? I wonder. Why is someone pitching this stuff at me? I'm not even aware that there is an issue or a controversy here. But I figure that if someone is going through the trouble to pitch this much manure my direction, it must be either to build a wall so I can't see what they are doing or a fortress for themselves that they can defend. And you know what? I don't like getting manure pitched at me.
So I put my special bs glasses on ( I was a boy scout, you see) and begin to wade through what is before me.
First of all, I read this: "Millions of people use Google’s search engine every day but don't realize that the balance inherent in U.S. copyright law helps enable it to exist. Here at Google, we strongly support the intellectual property rights of content creators and the protection of copyright. We think creators deserve to be rewarded for their work, and support the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity."
What is this stuff? I ask. But then through my special bs glasses I begin to see some themes. The first pitchfork of manure, "Millions of people use Google’s search engine every day but don't realize that the balance inherent in U.S. copyright law helps enable it to exist," is saying that what is to follow applies to all of us; in other words, it is attempting to get us to believe that it is in our own individual best-interest to support whatever balance is required for us to enjoy searching on Google. But it also says that whatever balance it intends to discuss is itself supported by US copyright law. And more than being supported by US law, the fact that the Google spinbot (writer) is actually invoking the law as a foundation upon which to make its coming argument, reveals the nature of the the real issue in the spin to follow.
OK, so what are they saying so far? They are saying Google is a good thing; the copyright law is a good thing and balance is a good thing. Alright. Sock it to me...(some free retro for ya.)
Then comes the second pitchfork of manure hurled at me: "Here at Google, we strongly support the intellectual property rights of content creators and the protection of copyright. We think creators deserve to be rewarded for their work, and support the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity." Ahh. Feigned support with the obligatory twist. They say they support: 1.) intellectual property rights of the content creator; 2.) the protection of copyright; 3.) reward to the deserving [content] creator; all fine and good; typical patronization. But what is the fourth concept that they support? 4.) the balance of copyright law as fundamental to promoting future creativity. Here again is that balance-of-copyright-law plea. This is the twist. This is the portal wherein Google wants to make an inroad, wedge its way in and stake a claim.
But why? What is motivating Google to even bring this up? Why throw manure into a perfectly good cup of coffee? What do they have on their Googagenda that necessitates this discussion?
Let's see if another mouthful of pitched manure gives us any indication: "While protecting the rights of creators, the Constitution and the courts place limits on the rights of copyright holders." OK, I see. Google is conceding that [content] creators have rights of protection. They say creators indeed have rights, BUT there are LIMITS to those rights. Not only are there limits, but the CONSTITUTION and the COURTS themselves have placed limits on [content] copyright holders. Oh, my. Where do I begin? Let me first of all confess that I am somewhat bewildered at Google's sudden patriotism. Why, all of a sudden they are hiding behind the Constitution of the very country who's laws they are trying to change regarding immigration so that more foreign nationals, who, unlike ordinary Americans, are qualified to work for Google, may get into this country. Let's make up our mind, Google; is this country restrictive to you or is it protective? I thought you loathed the laws of the US. Now you want to hide behind them? (Did someone forget to take their Riddilin today?)
But more than a fickle citation of Constitutional authority, herein we see the place where Google intends to drive its nail to stake its claim. It's all about LIMITATIONS of copyright protection. Yes, Google intends to build upon this foundation. (Kinda figures that with that much manure pitched, eventually the spinbot would have a big enough hole wherein to start to lay a foundation for a fortress...)
So naturally, Google brings forth a witness on this staked claim, "For example, copyright laws encourage others to make use of content in limited ways without seeking anyone's permission through the doctrine of "fair use." Yes, you see, there is precedent for using the content of others without their specific permission. But more than protected tendency, Google then takes it a step further to being an absolute right: "By enabling journalists, scholars and the general public to quote from and comment on others' writings, the fair use doctrine underscores basic rights of free expression." OK, so fair use enables people to quote from and comment on other people's copyrighted work. I myself am doing as much right here and now.
But it is at this point that a mystery begins to develop. Usually around this time in one of their spins, after a foundation has been laid and a fortress constructed, the Google spinbot will launch a diatribe at a particular enemy (concept, value, idea, law, roadblock, etc.) This time, however, while (assuming to be) possessing solid ground, instead of hurling an offensive, Google uncharacteristically decides, rather, to paint its walls!
Have a look at the next paragraph, "Fair use also assures that technological innovations such as the Internet itself can operate without violating copyright law. For instance, Google crawls the web, analyzes and indexes its content and makes a copy of each page on our servers. Our index is made up of the content of every web page which is crawled, optimized and stored in a variety of locations all over the world, to deliver results to users in a fraction of a second. In this way, we provide an opportunity for content creators to promote and capitalize on their creativity." Why the indulgence? Why the crayons and baby-steps? What flag is Google trying to wave?
But it does not stop there. Suddenly the national economic benefit card is played: "We've known for a while that fair use has allowed entire new industries and companies to grow, and to bring beneficial new services and innovative devices to consumers. Now, an interesting new study released yesterday by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (of which Google is a member) attempts to quantify the contribution of industries relying on fair use to the economy."
In spades: "The study -- which I encourage you to check out -- concludes that the "fair use economy" in 2006 accounted for $4.6 trillion in revenues (roughly one-sixth of total U.S. gross domestic product), employed more than 17 million people, and supported a payroll of $1.2 trillion (approximately one out of every eight workers in the US). It also generated $194 billion in exports and significant productivity growth. Using a methodology similar to a previous World Intellectual Property Organization guide, the results of the study demonstrate that fair use is an important economic driver in the digital age."
Alright, I do not know who the intended target is for this little vignette that Google has conjured up. It could be aimed at the US copyright laws. Having staked a claim, built a foundation, a fortress, and painted it, it could be that Google will use this preamble as the basis for a direct assault on DC later on. If that is the case, expect an upcoming battle against content copyright laws from Google's free use camp. And notice that Google will stretch the term, 'fair use' into 'advantageous use.' (With the advantage going to Google, of course, not to the content creator.) And also notice that were this same principle applied to PATENT laws, then this wonderful song and dance Google is performing spins completely the opposite direction. Isn't that interesting?!
Or, the target could be some countries in Europe where Google has run up against some (gasp!) obstacles. Why else would they hang out that economic carrot?
But either way, the spindar (spin-radar) is beeping loudly and it is crystal clear that the object of Google's spin here, is: CONTENT. Whether it be more liberal access to and use of American material or an attempted seduction of 'problematic' European administrations, here is what Google wants: "All Your Content Are Belong To Us."
Where they have it they want more. Where they have more they want full use of. It is in the public's own best interest; it is in the name of balance; it is to promote creativity; it is in the Constitution; it is in the law; it is a right!
And where they do not have it, this fortress they built in their blog post is nothing more than a common cat house: 'You, too, could add $4.6 trillion to your economy if you would just let All Your Content Are Belong To Us.'
Horse manure. Definitely.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
The Google Propaganda Assault Hits Congress AGAIN
Why does Google call its public policy blog a Public Policy Blog? They need to stop this shameless charade and call it what it is: The Google Propaganda Assault. For, once again, Google is using this platform to attempt to clothe its greedy manipulations of our government in a garment of feigned true concern for the American people.
Spit.
You see, last week another Google spinbot wrote about how unfair the US Patent system is and how it is in desperate need of a reformation. Quite unsatisfied with how the patent system currently functions, the Google blog laments, "Unfortunately, the patent system has not kept pace with the changes in the innovation economy." And then it decries what a terrible position this has put Google in, "Google and other technology companies increasingly face mounting legal costs to defend against frivolous patent claims from parties gaming the system to forestall competition or reap windfall profits."
So because Google feels like others are 'gaming the system,' to 'forestall competition' or 'reap windfall profits,' Google is coming to the legislature to 'game the system,' to try to change things that benefit Google and, thus, 'forestall competition,' so that Google can be in a better position to 'reap windfall profits.' (Now would be a good time to re-evaluate once again WHY Google calls it a Public Policy Blog, as mentioned above...)
Spit.
But you see Google claims that there is 'evidence' of a "growing consensus that patent law needs to be rebalanced in order to protect patent owners while ensuring that patent rights are not abused." Yes, you see, this is a growing consensus. It's everywhere! Why, I found some growing in my yard this morning. (Nix that; further inspection revealed that my dog had just been out there.) Yes, this is not just Google's concern, Google is just another group of many, many concerned citizens who have come to this same conclusion that the patent process is outdated. It's a consensus, for heaven's sake! Yea, a growing consensus...it's a movement, it is! (Please refer to previous parenthetical insert to ascertain exactly what kind of movement this actually is.)
Hold nose. Spit.
And, that movement has has achieved a voice of unity, one single voice with one single message: "A growing chorus of business leaders and companies spanning the technology, financial services, and traditional manufacturing industries has joined with legal scholars, economists, consumer and public interest organizations, government institutions and major editorial boards in calling for patent reform." Yes, the chorus is deafening. It is all-inclusive. It reaches to every level of our society. And together, it is singing the song and just so happens to be the same message that Google is preaching. More than a movement, it's a wave.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Spit.
But Google is not just whistling Dixie, in fact it has already lobbied Congress in this area. It has found itself on the Coalition for Patent Fairness. Wow. Imagine that. You move out of your bedroom and mom carries your stuff right into into the Stanford dorm. (Of course, you didn't have to attend a common college, because you were an elite.) And then, you move from your Stanford dorm room directly into your cubicle at the 'Plex (also called Hogwarts). (Where you get everything you could ever need. Free food. Free cookies, just like mom's. Heck, you deserve it. You're an elite.) And then, it isn't long and you find yourself on the steps of the U. S. Capitol building in DC on this wonderful committee. (After all, things there aren't going your way and it just isn't fair and you are there to make change happen. I mean, why should your company have to spend so much time in court defending your own patents? Things must be changed so that you don't have to do that. Sure, Microsoft has to spend a lot of time in court, seems they have been in court for about 15 years, but none of them went to Stanford! They are just your average people, but you, you are GOOGLE! And there is no reason that you should have to slug through the legal system, just because everybody else in this nation does. For you are elite!)
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Spit.
Suffice it to say that Google's lobby points are childishly transparent:
1. Damages apportionment. Damages should be calculated based on the fair share of the patent’s contribution to the value of a product, and not on the value of a whole product that has many components. So for example, a windshield wiper found to an infringe a patent should not spur a damage award based on the value of the entire car. (KnightCrawler's Translation: limit what we, Google, have to pay others if we are caught.)
2. Restricting forum-shopping. Certain district courts have become notorious for rarely invalidating a patent, and have tilted the balance too often in favor of plaintiffs. We support judicial venue provisions to ensure that patent lawsuits are brought only in district courts with a reasonable connection to the case. (KnightCrawler's Translation: Let Google get home field advantage by getting all our cases forwarded to the 9th Circus Court in San Francisco.) (Where there is a good likelihood that a judge's kid went to Stanford, and sees the rightness of our cause.)
3. Post-grant review. The patent system should include a meaningful second chance for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to review potentially problematic patents in a timely way, thereby promoting high-quality patents. (KnighrCrawler's Translation: Waaah. We want our way. And when we don't get it, we want YOU to reevaluate your decision about our way and we want you to do it now.)
4. Willfullness. Patent infringes can be forced to pay triple the damages in cases where they are found to have "willfully" infringed a patent, but that standard has been devalued. Punitive triple damages should be reserved for cases of truly egregious conduct. (KnightCrawler's Translation: We want the hammer for our competition's infractions, yet velvet gloves for our own.)
But more than just a movement, a chorus or a wave, Google describes its efforts as downright, genUine American, "Low-quality patents and escalating legal costs are currently hurting the ability of U.S. companies to compete globally, and that in turn hurts U.S. workers and consumers." That's right, Google's got nothing but the national interest of Joe U.S. Citizen in mind and at heart with every step of its lobbying activities. It's all about what's best for the "U.S. workers and consumers, " don't ya know... can't ya see... wouldn't you believe! No selfishness at all; empirically motivated to benefit the American. Yes, and in their other hand, there is a fresh jar of newly-squeezed snake oil that will heal practically any ailment you might be suffering from.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Wipe snake-oil from clothes. Spit.
The main point here is that Google is ONCE AGAIN lobbying YOUR Senators and YOUR Representatives so that Google can get what Google wants. They are seeking to change OUR laws so that the situation suits GOOGLE better, not necessarily you and me. They want the way cleared for them to have an advantage, to make more profit, to build an irrevocable empire, and to spend less to defend it. And they are cloaking it all in language that attempts for you to think that they are on your side, looking out for our best interests. If this were the DMV, they would be crying for the laws to be changed so that they wouldn't have to wait in line like everybody else. Elites, you see, don't wait in line. Lines are for all the rest; who eat cake.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Wipe snake-oil from clothes. Spit. Send a cake to the Google kids.
Spit.
You see, last week another Google spinbot wrote about how unfair the US Patent system is and how it is in desperate need of a reformation. Quite unsatisfied with how the patent system currently functions, the Google blog laments, "Unfortunately, the patent system has not kept pace with the changes in the innovation economy." And then it decries what a terrible position this has put Google in, "Google and other technology companies increasingly face mounting legal costs to defend against frivolous patent claims from parties gaming the system to forestall competition or reap windfall profits."
So because Google feels like others are 'gaming the system,' to 'forestall competition' or 'reap windfall profits,' Google is coming to the legislature to 'game the system,' to try to change things that benefit Google and, thus, 'forestall competition,' so that Google can be in a better position to 'reap windfall profits.' (Now would be a good time to re-evaluate once again WHY Google calls it a Public Policy Blog, as mentioned above...)
Spit.
But you see Google claims that there is 'evidence' of a "growing consensus that patent law needs to be rebalanced in order to protect patent owners while ensuring that patent rights are not abused." Yes, you see, this is a growing consensus. It's everywhere! Why, I found some growing in my yard this morning. (Nix that; further inspection revealed that my dog had just been out there.) Yes, this is not just Google's concern, Google is just another group of many, many concerned citizens who have come to this same conclusion that the patent process is outdated. It's a consensus, for heaven's sake! Yea, a growing consensus...it's a movement, it is! (Please refer to previous parenthetical insert to ascertain exactly what kind of movement this actually is.)
Hold nose. Spit.
And, that movement has has achieved a voice of unity, one single voice with one single message: "A growing chorus of business leaders and companies spanning the technology, financial services, and traditional manufacturing industries has joined with legal scholars, economists, consumer and public interest organizations, government institutions and major editorial boards in calling for patent reform." Yes, the chorus is deafening. It is all-inclusive. It reaches to every level of our society. And together, it is singing the song and just so happens to be the same message that Google is preaching. More than a movement, it's a wave.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Spit.
But Google is not just whistling Dixie, in fact it has already lobbied Congress in this area. It has found itself on the Coalition for Patent Fairness. Wow. Imagine that. You move out of your bedroom and mom carries your stuff right into into the Stanford dorm. (Of course, you didn't have to attend a common college, because you were an elite.) And then, you move from your Stanford dorm room directly into your cubicle at the 'Plex (also called Hogwarts). (Where you get everything you could ever need. Free food. Free cookies, just like mom's. Heck, you deserve it. You're an elite.) And then, it isn't long and you find yourself on the steps of the U. S. Capitol building in DC on this wonderful committee. (After all, things there aren't going your way and it just isn't fair and you are there to make change happen. I mean, why should your company have to spend so much time in court defending your own patents? Things must be changed so that you don't have to do that. Sure, Microsoft has to spend a lot of time in court, seems they have been in court for about 15 years, but none of them went to Stanford! They are just your average people, but you, you are GOOGLE! And there is no reason that you should have to slug through the legal system, just because everybody else in this nation does. For you are elite!)
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Spit.
Suffice it to say that Google's lobby points are childishly transparent:
1. Damages apportionment. Damages should be calculated based on the fair share of the patent’s contribution to the value of a product, and not on the value of a whole product that has many components. So for example, a windshield wiper found to an infringe a patent should not spur a damage award based on the value of the entire car. (KnightCrawler's Translation: limit what we, Google, have to pay others if we are caught.)
2. Restricting forum-shopping. Certain district courts have become notorious for rarely invalidating a patent, and have tilted the balance too often in favor of plaintiffs. We support judicial venue provisions to ensure that patent lawsuits are brought only in district courts with a reasonable connection to the case. (KnightCrawler's Translation: Let Google get home field advantage by getting all our cases forwarded to the 9th Circus Court in San Francisco.) (Where there is a good likelihood that a judge's kid went to Stanford, and sees the rightness of our cause.)
3. Post-grant review. The patent system should include a meaningful second chance for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to review potentially problematic patents in a timely way, thereby promoting high-quality patents. (KnighrCrawler's Translation: Waaah. We want our way. And when we don't get it, we want YOU to reevaluate your decision about our way and we want you to do it now.)
4. Willfullness. Patent infringes can be forced to pay triple the damages in cases where they are found to have "willfully" infringed a patent, but that standard has been devalued. Punitive triple damages should be reserved for cases of truly egregious conduct. (KnightCrawler's Translation: We want the hammer for our competition's infractions, yet velvet gloves for our own.)
But more than just a movement, a chorus or a wave, Google describes its efforts as downright, genUine American, "Low-quality patents and escalating legal costs are currently hurting the ability of U.S. companies to compete globally, and that in turn hurts U.S. workers and consumers." That's right, Google's got nothing but the national interest of Joe U.S. Citizen in mind and at heart with every step of its lobbying activities. It's all about what's best for the "U.S. workers and consumers, " don't ya know... can't ya see... wouldn't you believe! No selfishness at all; empirically motivated to benefit the American. Yes, and in their other hand, there is a fresh jar of newly-squeezed snake oil that will heal practically any ailment you might be suffering from.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Wipe snake-oil from clothes. Spit.
The main point here is that Google is ONCE AGAIN lobbying YOUR Senators and YOUR Representatives so that Google can get what Google wants. They are seeking to change OUR laws so that the situation suits GOOGLE better, not necessarily you and me. They want the way cleared for them to have an advantage, to make more profit, to build an irrevocable empire, and to spend less to defend it. And they are cloaking it all in language that attempts for you to think that they are on your side, looking out for our best interests. If this were the DMV, they would be crying for the laws to be changed so that they wouldn't have to wait in line like everybody else. Elites, you see, don't wait in line. Lines are for all the rest; who eat cake.
Hold nose. Plug ears. Roll eyes. Wipe snake-oil from clothes. Spit. Send a cake to the Google kids.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
