Why is Google in trouble, why are they going public? They must find someone else to hold the bag now that everyone under the sun is filing lawsuits against them. If I were the original investors I would want my money right now also, since the company may not be as strong as some think they are. When you do the crime you must do the time, right? http://www.internetnews.com/article.php/3387211 Too bad the suckers that get left with the stock when it hits it high will be the ones who pay, while Larry and Sergey ride off into the sunset with their money (those who buy the stock in the public market).
Sounds like the old Ali-Frazier battles to me! Fun to watch from the sidelines but, I wouldn't want to be in the middle.
So why are they in trouble? Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Google's recent influx of lawsuits looks to me like people trying to capitalize on Google's success. People have sued Jesus and Santa Claus in the past, that doesn't mean "Jesus is in trouble". So why exactly do you think they are in trouble with this particular lawsuit? A general patent that says no one else can do "paid search" would never hold up in court. It's just another one of the millions of retarded patents the US patent office grants. If you really wanted to, you probably could get a patent on the color green. But I doubt anyone would have much success trying to enforce that patent in court. And even if a paid search patent was enforceable, it's a pretty weak argument that Google is even doing paid search. Advertising displayed based on what someone searches for is not a paid search in my mind. Overture is really grasping for anything it can with this one.
Well Shawn since 95% of Google profits came from contextual advertising and this dispute affects that what makes you think that it is not a threat? I was looking for the other thread we started on this here and could not find it, I thought I could add this post to that thread but it seems that it does not exist.
Overture is probably based in California where "sue" is everyone's middle name..............................
I am sure you could find something, but does it mean you will win?? Isn't california the state where if you broke into someone's house and say you slipped on a toy and fell down the stairs and broke your leg you would win the lawsuit for them leaving the toy on the stairs. It seems like there was a crazy lawsuit like that about 15 years ago when I lived there. You should probably go after someone bigger like Google and say that they have kept you from getting a job since you are protecting us from them with your research. They may settle out of court for a couple of million.
Maybe if they held a patent for contextual advertising (which they don't). But even if they did, a general patent on contextual advertising wouldn't hold up either. Contextual advertising is a fundamental way to advertise. You don't advertise fiber supplements in Maxim magazine for example. You run ads that are contextually relevant to your user base. Google simply took that to the Internet before others did, it's really not a new idea when it comes down to it.
Well Shawn like I said, we have been down this same road before here at DP, I just could not find the thread. But you and I covered this in that thread where ever it is, you know it is about the interface that Google uses to sell contextual advertising, don't act like you do not know what is going on, because you do.
Seems to be big news to me, would you say that something that determines the balance of power in this industry would be worthy to be discussed here?
Anthony - Google isn't in trouble, you know it. MS dishes out cash for this type of stuff all of the time, it isn't an issue.
Google had to go public anthony. The reason they didn't before was to hide some stuff from the SEC. Now that they have reached a certain employment limit they are going to have to release it to the SEC anyways, so why not go public and get a ton of extra funding. It was clearly the thing to do, if their only intent was to safeguard some of their financials. Now that they didn't have that choice anymore, time to make some money.
If they actually had a chance to beat Google in court, it would be more newsworthy. This is one of those things that I would feel perfectly comfortable with betting everything I own that Google will not change because of it.
Anything with the word Google in it will get front-page coverage. I could sue Google because they don't give me free candy, and it would get news coverage.
So anything with M$ gets front page coverage also, that does not mean that this will not hurt the company on Wall Street. You know how that game works, don't you? Buy the rumor, sell the news, panic starts, stocks drop! Google has a lot to worry about, you do not have to believe it if you do not want to.
" If you really wanted to, you probably could get a patent on the color green." No, but you could get it service-marked. Dow Corning has service-marked pink in connection with their insulation products (the one they use the cartoon "Pink Panther" to advertise), and that registration has been upheld in court. Wotta woil. [Mind, that doesn't mean they have some exclusive right to the color--only to its use in relation to certain kinds of product.]
Owlcroft, I did not know you were a Led Zeppelin fan, that "Wotta woil" is a cool statement. Can I use it in a song? Oh, I wana whole Watta woil, I wana whole Watta woil, I wana whole WATTTAAA WOILLLLLLLLLLL!