Google says its rivals have “placed a cloud” on the Android eco-system through a wave of lawsuits based on old Nortel patents. Now, it’s filed a lawsuit of its own to defend the Nexus and its customers.

Mushroom cloud
photo: Shutterstock / Sergej Khakimullin

Update: This article produced a torrent of abuse, accusations and even some insight from commenters, John Gruber and others. I’ve responded further below.

Google has filed a new lawsuit to challenge an Apple-backed consortium known as Rockstar that is using dubious patents to threaten its partners and customers in the mobile device industry.

In a complaint filed Monday in San Jose, Google claims that Rockstar’s patent campaign is taking aim at hundreds of California tech companies and that the litigation has “placed a cloud on Google’s Android platform,” threatening Nexus devices in particular.

The lawsuit amounts to an effort to shield ASUS and other companies that use the open source Android operating system from a legal extermination effort by Rockstar, which filed a wave of lawsuits in late October:

Among the myriad companies ensnared in Rockstar’s patent dragnet are customers and partners of Google who use the Android platform in their devices, including ASUS, HTC, Huawei, LG, Pantech, Samsung, and ZTE.

Despite its cocky name, Rockstar is simply a corporate patent troll hatched by Google rivals — including Apple, Microsoft and BlackBerry — after the rivals spent $4.5 billion ($2.5 billion from Apple) in 2012 for a trove of patents from Nortel, a long defunct Canadian telco company. Today, Rockstar employs once-proud Canadian engineers to help with the trolling operation. The filing says:

Rockstar produces no products and practices no patents. Instead, Rockstar employs a staff of engineers in Ontario, Canada, who examine other companies’ successful products to find anything that Rockstar might use to demand and extract licenses to its patents under threat of litigation.

The complaint also states that Rockstar’s trolling campaign has targeted more than 100 companies, and that Rockstar’s CEO has said that Facebook, LinkedIn and every other tech company is infringing the old Nortel patents.

Such claims may seem absurd, and could speed calls to reform a dysfunctional patent system, but they also present a very real business problem for Android makers since the lawsuits mean an ongoing risk of injunctions and unpredictable jury verdicts.

Google appears to be especially concerned about the Nexus line of phones. It asks the court to declare that “the Nexus 5, Nexus 7, or Nexus 10 devices sold by Google directly or indirectly” don’t infringe seven patents that belong to Rockstar or to “MobileStar, ” another shell company that “was formed for litigation one day before Rockstar filed its lawsuits against Google’s customers.”

As for the patents, they relate to basic functions like “mobile hotspot functionality,”  “VPN management functionality” and “Messaging and Notification.”

It’s unclear, however, how far Google will get with its attempt to get a declaration that the patents don’t infringe.

In April, America’s patent appeals court ruled Cisco couldn’t sue to protect its customers from patent infringements suits targeting customers that used its routers. This could create procedural obstacles in Google’s attempt to put brakes on the sprawling Android litigation.

Meanwhile, Rockstar has also expanded its troll campaign with new lawsuits against Cisco and the cable industry earlier this month. Such tactics may suggest that the troll company may be getting anxious about how to recoup the $4.5 billion its owners spent to create it.

This week, Bloomberg cited Rockstar sources who said the troll has had “little success in landing large licensing deals,” and that some of its patents are now up for sale — suggesting that companies are resisting Rockstar’s demands for protection money.

More broadly, a modicum of sanity may return to the patent system next year as the Supreme Court has announced it will review whether software patents should be eligible in the first place, and as Congress pushes forward with a law to rein in patent trolls.

Google’s complaint with some of the relevant bits underlined is below.

Update: here’s a crude annotation of some of the comments below, and my responses:

“Hey, Jeff, you’ve obviously been bought off by Google.”

A: This isn’t FOSSPatents. I don’t accept money, favors or anything else from the companies I write about and neither do any of my colleagues at Gigaom. We wouldn’t have any credibility if we did.

“This article is biased against Apple”

A: Yes, it is biased. It’s biased against grubby business tactics and, especially, against America’s broken patent system. Apple is not the worst offender; however, it’s a shame that Apple has succumbed to patent privateering and related tactics that are the hallmark of Microsoft and other companies whose innovative years are in the rear view mirror.

The Rockstar litigation will lead to a fortune in research dollars getting diverted to lawyers, waste-of-time depositions and parasitic patent exchanges.

“Google does the same thing”

A: Yes, Google bid on the Nortel patents and filed lawsuits based on the Motorola portfolio it acquired. But these acts were defensive tactics in response to the effort of Microsoft and others to game the broken patent system.

And unlike Apple, Google is promoting a saner patent system by donating intellectual property to create a litigation-free space for cloud developers. Companies like Twitter and RackSpace are also shaking up the status quo. Apple, on the other hand, is embracing IP maximalism that will help it in the short term but damage the innovation eco-system in the long-run. Google may turn into a patent troll one day, but for now it has resisted the impulse.

“But Apple invented the iPhone and Google stole it”

A: I don’t have an opinion on that. It’s a question for the gadget geeks. But for the purposes of this story — which is about Nortel patents — it’s irrelevant. The patent system is supposed to promote innovation; carving up the long dead carcass of Nortel to feed the lawyers doesn’t do this.

“Jeff, you’re a crank who doesn’t understand the patent system”

A: Maybe. But I’m not the only one. The Economist, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the New York TimesArs Technica and the scholarly community are shrieking out for reform too.

Google Dec Action vs Rockstar

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. So the Nexus products and Android don’t infringe on the Nortel patents that Google desperately wanted to buy?
    Yeah right.

    1. Dear shill,

      Google was bidding π billion dollars to inflate the price of the worthless patents so they would become an expensive liability for “Rockstar”.

      Merry Christmas.

      1. “Your Honor”.

        “We bid PI Billions just to run up the price”

        It seems on the surface like a promising defense, but do you think the Court will buy it?

        My own opinion is that Google would be screwed, but, fortunately, you aren’t one of Google’s lawyers.

      2. If the patents are so worthless, why is google so scared of them that they are pre-emptively suing?

        Reality, is, google has been violating patents constantly, while simultaneously suing everyone for “violating” FRAND patents that they refused to license under FRAND terms.

        Google is the troll here– refusing to honor FRAND agreements, suing Apple, and everyone else.

        1. The article argues “Such claims [...] present a very real business problem for Android makers since the lawsuits mean an ongoing risk of injunctions and unpredictable jury verdicts.”

        2. Not even a little bit true. You need to do a fact check before you post crap like this.

          The reality is that the lawsuit involving the FRAND patents was a motorola lawsuit that was set in motion long before Google bought them. Did they follow through with it? Yes, but it is likely because the investment was already at a point where it would not be financially smart to back out. Patent lawsuits are not cheap to put together.

          Meanwhile, Apple has been involved in more lawsuits than any other tech company in the last ten years and Microsoft has been extorting, yes extorting android OEM’s with patents that relate to legacy file systems that are barely relevant.

          If this proves anything it proves how broken the patent system is, allowing a group of corporations to buy patents with the sole intention of using them to waste the time of the courts and hurt competition which, regardless of your opinion, is bad for consumers.

          Google is 100% in the right on this. They are resisting an incredibly obvious troll. It is also worth mentioning that the only devices named in the suit are android devices even though devices running other operating systems violate them as well. In other words, windows and windows phone have been conveniently left out while operating under the pretense that they are not microsoft. This is unethical and I hope this forces widespread patent reform.

          1. Microsoft, Apple, and Blackberry all have licenses to the underlying patents in question that they bought from Nortel. So what other operating systems should they be suing besides Android?

          2. juancarlosdeburbon Sk0ly Wednesday, December 25, 2013

            Google is circling the wagons. They bought the Motorola patents to block iOS. Apple and crew bought the Nortel patents to block Android. This is what modern tech companies do.

            It’s safe to assume that Apple’s lawyers have been at this longer than Google’s. More than likely Google will be on the brown end of the stick.

            1. Why would this be safe to assume? You think Google cannot retain counsel of the same quality as Apple? Why not?

            2. Apple has an incredibly robust internal legal counsel. If Steve Jobs learned anything from the Microsoft war in the 1990s, it was building an incredibly talented legal department. Job did this almost immediately after getting the interim CEO position. He understood the critical importance of protecting intellectual property and defending it aggressively.

              Google will probably retain external counsel, but they won’t have the expertise that Apple’s counsel already has both conceptually and practically defending intellectual property in the world courts.

          3. Thank You Fandrioid boy but your are not the Judge and can you explain why Google wanted to but the Nortel Patents for PI dollars ?

        3. I made a account just so I can call you on your BS! You are either trolling just like apple or you are completely stupid and don’t know what you’re talking about. All of your comments haven’t been nothing but fanboy comments. I don’t know about this Google vs apple war but I do know enough to know that everything you have been saying is false and I guarantee you you can’t provide a link to back up your OPINIONS. Everything you have said is something I hear from fanboys not people who actually know about Apple’s patent trolling. It don’t take a genius to see how apple is the one trolling and suing everybody. Do some research because you don’t know a darn thing

          1. I see that you didn’t provide any links to back up your opinions either.

        4. No true. You don’t know waist for are talking about.

      3. These were sealed bids (which is why Google failed to bid enough).

  2. This article is off-base if the press’s report that Google declined to join the Rockstar consortium back when the Nortel patents were auctioned was true. See the article here: http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/google-had-opportunity-join-group-won-nortels-6000-patents. It is extremely puzzling that Google would decline to join the consortium and then turned around to buy Motorola for its patent portfolio.

    1. You are either confused by the spin of one party or you’re mindlessly taking their side. And by the way as oppose to the patent troll in question Motorola is an active manufacturer of consumer technology, so get your facts straight.

      1. I see, Motorola is an active manufacturer, and therefore not a “troll”. but apple, who has never sold or made a single iPhone is a “troll”?

        And we should “get [our] facts straight”? Hard to do when you just make them up.

        1. Rockstar is a patent troll. It may be partially owned by Apple, Microsoft, et al, but it adds no thing to the world and exists only to ensure no retaliation takes place since it produces nothing. That’s the definition of a patent troll.

          Apple is using a patent troll even if they aren’t one directly. It’s still a douchey move.

          1. juancarlosdeburbon one Wednesday, December 25, 2013

            Lest we forget that Google is doing EXACTLY the same thing with the Motorola patents.

            Hello, Pot, meet Kettle.

            1. Please post links to suits started after Motorola was bought by Google.

            2. Jim, while it’s true that some of the patent lawsuits instigated by Motorola Mobility started before Google’s acquisition was completed, the pre-purchase agreement between the two companies meant that Motorola was required to seek Google’s permission to start them.


              And this lawsuit was filed well after the completion of the deal:


            3. Jeremy Chappell Jim Friday, December 27, 2013

              You are kidding aren’t you? Surely your memory can’t be THAT short.

              Google bought Motorola to GET their patent portfolio – upsetting all the Android OEMs in the process.

              They even tried to use FRAND patents against Apple (and others).

      2. Sean, which facts in richardkoo’s comment are you disputing?

    2. Google is operating Motorola as a business. Clearly they wanted more than just patents. Rockstar is nothing more than a troll.

      1. Google bought Motorola when it did because the Motorola CEO with support from Carl Icahn wanted to juice the sales price by threatening patent infringement against many of the Android OEM’s.

        It worked.

        Google got a second tier manufacturer on the way down, and so far, almost no valuable patents for $12B.

      2. Sad that your side can’t make an argument beyond ad hominem.

        You call Apple and Microsoft trolls? Apple invented the smartphone. They are obviously “operating…as a business”. Microsoft has been shipping phone software since before google has been in business.

        So, clearly reality is warped by whatever you think is good for google, and you don’t have the integrity to simply make arguments about the issue based on facts.

        No, you call people “troll” as if that reflects on them… the converse is true.

        1. “Apple invented the smartphone” <– folks, we have a winner: the single most ignorant, hilarious comment on this thread http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DwFeC25BM9E0

          1. OK, maybe it’s a mistake to say that Apple “invented the smartphone.” I was using a Palm Treo long before I bought an iPhone.

            I wouldn’t call Apple an INVENTOR. Apple is an INNOVATOR.

            Your linked video misses this point completely, basically calling Apple an integrator, not an innovator. I think that’s a difference without a distinction.

            Apple holds many patents on its inventions, but they’re largely for features, not complete products.

            The GUI, the iMac, the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad were not inventions. They were innovations of existing products. Xerox wasn’t selling the Star. All in one computers didn’t sell as well as the iMac. The Archos and the Rio weren’t great sellers either. Mainstream consumers didn’t buy the Treo, geeks did. Microsoft’s tablet offerings never sold enough units to maintain viability.

            Yes, I’m equating large sales with innovation, but there’s a reason stuff catches on and becomes popular, and more often than not it’s because it’s good. Now, that may not always be true, but that’s the yardstick we’ve got. Would anyone argue that Windows was an innovation compared to DOS? I wouldn’t, and I’ve been an Apple customer since 1988.

            Apple looked at what was out there, and they made something that they thought was better. This is the company’s modus operandi, they always do this, it’s nothing new.

            I would argue that the App Store was an actual invention, and that the iTunes Store was an innovation.

            If we’re to believe Chris DeSalvo as he is quoted in “Dogfight” (I know Chris, and he’s no fanboy, having worked at both Apple and Google), Google started over again on their smartphone designs after the iPhone came out.

            Doesn’t that suggest that they copied the iPhone, and there’s some validity to Apple’s ire, and lawsuits? I mean, where there’s smoke, there’s fire…

      3. So which is worse using SEPs to attack Apple or Rockstar whose participants are actively manufacturing products.

        Yes ripping off Apple patents by android of google is ok, right?

    3. They declined because they thought they would have won it alone. Owning it alone gives you a lot more power than co-owning it. But now it looks like they’re be getting owned instead.


  3. Apple / Microsoft strategy:

    Push the patent system as far as possible … past what any sane person would consider the breaking point.

    One of two things happen:
    1. The patent system remains broken, and they make a ton of money
    2. The patent system is substantially reformed to prevent this nonsense and they can save millions (billions) on fending off the patent trolls coming after them and all their partners.

    Basically, it’s win/win. Personally, I’m hoping for the latter as it’s better for the industry as a whole.

    Granted, even if they’re not doing it on purpose, the more out of hand this stuff gets the more pressure there is to reform. Even if they’re just greedy bastards, I hope they push it to absurd lengths so the politicians have no choice but to clean this mess up.

    1. The problem with your argument is that it is based on a false premise.

      Apple has been using the patent system as it was intended, patenting legitimate, novel inventions.

      The idea that they are being “insane” is a rationalization from those who dont’ want to admit that Google found itself behind in smartphones so it just stole the technology it needed to catch up.

      Rather than admit that, they pretend like Apple never invented anything.

      Which is pretty stupid, if you think about it.

      But then, these are Apple hater,s they really don’t seem to care about the facts, history, logic, etc.

      1. Another mindless apple fanboy who didn’t even read the article before rushing to the defense of such a terrible company.

      2. You’re saying this like Apple actually invented all of these things. You’re missing out on some of the patents they sued for:

        * Skeumorphism
        * Messaging and Notifications
        * Rounded corners on a hand-held telphony device
        * Pinch-to-zoom (no, they did not invent that)

        And a lot of others. Get facts straight before you post.

        1. Ohh the irony. Here you are calling on people to get their facts straight before posting, and yet your own post is contains non fact.

          Apple neither patented rectangles with rounded corners, nor did they sue anybody for it.


        2. @Hen Aref someone talking about “inventing” a design patent (the rounded corners), and talking about skeumorphism like Apple patented it and then asking people to “Get facts straight”? You win the award for least self aware, least informed person on the Internet for this week.

      3. I agree, Apple (and Microsoft) has used the patent system as intended for ages now. They’ve even come to the aid of developers in trying to block a patent troll that was targeting apps that used (IIRC) In-App Purchaes.

        The big guys like Microsoft and Apple have gigantic patent portfolios that in the past have provided a form of protection from litigation (most lawsuits were settled and included a cross-licensing agreement). They are also a source of significant revenue, which is why they’re so wary of patent reform. They don’t want the billions they’ve invested in IP to suddenly vaporize.

        To switch tactics at this stage and be part of a consortium that uses NPEs to target others caught me a bit by surprise. The biggest difference between this situation and the normal troll nonsense is that everyone knows who’s behind it.

        And there in lies the rub. The old strategy of sueing, having some money change hands, and striking a cross-licensing deal is dead in the presence of NPEs.

        I read a few days ago that NPEs are now involved in 65% of patent related lawsuits, up from 5% a couple of years ago. The problem is getting larger very very quickly … I think everyone sees that reform is coming. It has to.

        So … Is the consortium trying to extract as much cash as possible before reform comes, or are they intentionally adding to the fire to make it even more obvious how messed up things are? I’m sure it’s the first, but I like to think it could be the second :)

  4. Google is a search engine and ad click company. They deliberately stole Apple’s iOS IP to create a free OS to intentionally hinder Apple’s mobile hardware business and disrupt the entire mobile industry at that time. Rockstar should go directly after Google’s mobile products (the Nexus line) and teach Google a lesson in fair play. If it’s OK for you to step on our toes and then it’s OK for us to step on your toes. I doubt Google would appreciate Apple building a search engine business simply to put a crimp in Google’s search engine business.

    1. @ laughingboy are you actually retarded or trolling?

      1. I don’t know what do *you* call someone who makes an insightful, factually correct comment?

        Google is just asking to be sued here, and google has massive liability. Rockstar has no potential liability here, and a lot of patents that google is infringing.

        Legitimate patents.

        I guess when all you’ve got is blind mindless hatred, you fall back on adhominem.

        1. Google was building Android before Apple publicly released iOS, so no, this guy didn’t contribute anything at all to the conversation. The point of this whole debate is that Rockstar has patents that they don’t make any money with except by suing people, and that’s fucked up. Patents exist so that inventors can make their money back on their inventions, not so people can buy them up and use them to fuck other people out of huge sums of money.

          1. Yes, they were building Android before iOS. Pre-iOS, though, they were building it as a rip-off of Blackberry. After Steve Jobs got up on stage and showed off the iPhone, Google scrapped a lot of the existing Android work and set to work on making it more like iOS. That’s why early Android phones still had physical keyboards and rollerballs. Y’know, like all pre-BB10 Blackberry phones had.

            As good as Android is, it started out riding on the coattails of what was the biggest phone brand in the world, then jumped to the hot new thing before release.

            And before you ask for a source,

          2. LOL, there are entire books debunking this insane Fandroid talking point, but you guys still try to use it.

            Android is nothing more than a reverse engineered, iOS. A copy. Get over it.

        2. You should just stop commenting with your stupid comments. Your trying to defend apple with your OPINIONS when everybody else knows the FACTS. It don’t take a genius to see the apple and Microsoft to companies that Google has been dominating are just pissed. They can’t compete with Google, Google is taking up all there market share so what do they do? They team up like little kids to during Google. If you have to sue for something like pinch to zoom that shows how desperate you are. Google should sue the pants off apple for taking so many features from android. I got facts to back up what I’m saying looking for yourself. You should just shut up because your just a apple fanboy defending a company that has turn into nothing but trolls

          1. Apple is THE most profitable smartphone maker. Now, it’s true that Android has a much larger share of the market, but Google doesn’t make jack from that.

            The only two companies making a profit in smartphones are Apple and Samsung, and Apple is making the lion’s share of it.

            You don’t have to believe me, just do a few searches and see for yourself.

            So, if Apple is sucking all the profit out of the market, just how long are all those Android phone makers going to last?

    2. You are absolutely correct. Google is the one at fault here and deserves to get every negative thing coming to them.

      1. No there not. I Garauntee you you can’t pull any fact to back that up. It should be the other way around with google suing Apple. Apple is doing all this because there scared of google plain and simple

        1. Google has nothing on Apple. Just a bunch of useless patents that they overpaid for when they bought Motorola for $12.5 billion. Google tried suing many times and lost every time.

          The funny part is that Google was invited to join Rockstar and thus gain immunity, but they refused:

          They tried to be funny and bid pi but got outbid. Then they bid $4.4B but also got outbid. After they lost out on Novell’s patents, they then paid $12.5 B. Afterwards refer to my first paragraph.

          Cry yourself to sleep, fandroid.

        2. So, please be specific: exactly WHAT should Google sue Apple for?

          Surely you’re not suggesting that Apple copied Google Now with Siri’s latest updates? Siri can’t do half the things Google Now can do, and Siri is still MUCH less accurate that Google’s voice recognition, which I think is the best in the industry.

          Is it your assertion that Apple stole features or infringed patents belonging to Android? If so, which ones?

  5. I don’t see how Google really has much of chance here. They are a large, high tech company with lots of money. They have enough engineers and lawyers to know whether or not they are infringing on a patent or not. Regardless, how large or small, infringement is illegal. If google (or any other company) can’t come up with their own technical solution why in the world can’t they try to license use of the patent. Sure, there may be a number of patents that are small or petty, but why not arbitrate them before breaking the law.

    1. The thing is you don’t have to patent a specific technological solution. Neithe Apple or Google has infringed by stealing code or what have you.
      What you can patent with the current patent system is general ideas. Like Microsoft getting the patent for double-clicking. Apple’s patent for sliding your finger across the screen to unlock it.
      You patent “sending messages between two phones” not the sms protocoll. Which means you now own the patent that is needed for skype, snapchat, facebook messanger, regular sms, textsecure – you name it.
      And on top of that you don’t even have to be the person who originally got the patent, you can just buy it and the “invention” is yours to hang over everyone elses heads.

      This. Holds. Technology. Back.

  6. I see very, very obvious bias, Mr. Jeff John Roberts; are you even trying?

    Dubious patents? Trolll? Based on your fantasy that Android is both free and open?

    Not buying it.

    Google offered PI billion for same. They lost.

    Sucks to be them.

    1. It’s funny how, Apple being a company that makes hundreds of millions of devices is called a “troll”, but then you point out that google is trolling (by refusing to honor FRAND agreements, for instance) the claim is they can’t be a troll because they make devices. (Which tehy only do after buying motorola.)

      The apple haters are nothing if not consistently hypocritical.

      1. Apple isn’t a patent troll. Rockstar is.

  7. Obama can put an end to it with one signature.

    1. Exactly, said despite Whatever, Obama just signed is considered complete only
      thuoc kich duc nu

  8. This article is frankly dishonest. It is nothing more than a politically motivated hit piece, written by someone who clearly has zero knowledge or understanding of the patent system (and I’m being generous, because if he did know anything, then his false statements would be lies)… for the purpose of trying to white wash Google’s crime of shipping counterfeit iPhones.

    Google is the patent troll here, having sued Apple (via its Motorola subsidiary) many years ago for “violations” of patents Apple was willing to license (and which google had promised to license) on FRAND terms.

    Google started the patent war, by being the first troll. They also started the “patents need to be reformed” movement, whose sole purpose is to let android off the hook for stealing Apple’s work.

    That Gigaom would publish such an article shows a serious lack of integrity. I hold Om personally responsible for this, and will remind him of it quite loudly at the next public appearance he makes.

  9. Author bio: “Jeff … and practiced intellectual property and media law.”

    If you practiced IP law, then you have absolutely no excuse for misrepresenting patents or their nature, and the nature of the patent system.

    This means this article amounts to nothing more than an attempted fraud.

    I wonder how you can sleep at night, seriously. I mean, if you have no honor, if you don’t even have an interest in telling the truth, and your political ideology (which is anti-technology, anti-capitalist in the extreme) is so evil, that you will sell out your integrity for something so meager as an article like this… what kind of person does that make you?

    The mind boggles.
    – You call the patents “dubious”, yet google offered $3B for them. You have given no reason to believe they are dubious and the preponderance of evidence is to the contrary- including legal cases, the review by the patent office, and the review by due diligence teams at no less than 5 companies, INCLUDING google. Yet you call them dubious so casually. How can you tell such a lie with out a seconds thought?
    – “Rockstar is simply a corporate patent troll hatched by Google rivals” — Frankly dishonest. “Troll” is what you call a NPE. None of the companies named are NPEs. Further, Google was invited to join the consortium but declined. Your calling it “hatched by google rivals” implies that they did so to go after google, which is simply a lie.

    There are many more, of course. But it is clear that the truth is of no consequence to you in your campaign to rationalize googles violations of other peoples intellectual property.

    So, I ask again, how can you sleep at night?

    Have you managed to delude even yourself into thinking that violence against the innocent is not evil, and therefore, you’re on the side of good? And if so, do you by any chance have a below average IQ? Or a dysfunction that prevents critical thinking?

    I really cannot understand it. Maybe you just think your readership is really, really stupid?

    1. Why do you call yourself an “engineer” when you lack the mental aptitude and education to actually be one? You’re an idiot, a shill and a very ignorant person. I hope you blow an artery defending your shill companies because the world would be better without a piece of garbage like you.

      1. You should play nice at Xmas.

      2. You are probably not much older than twelve.

      3. @hacker — youre a troll. you offer nothing but ad hominem insults, no facts. you lose.

  10. Apple launches patent suit: “trolls!”

    Google launches patent suit: “valiant and brilliant defensive strategy!”

    Yeah you’re not a fanboy and this is “journalism”, not blog spam.

Comments have been disabled for this post