The sad thing about all of this is that the patent system in our industry is in fact horribly, cynically broken.
What really confuses me about this whole thing is that no one seems to disagree that the patent system is broken. (Well, except maybe Nilay Patel.) So, if you agree with Google that the patent system needs some nontrivial amount of serious reform, why spend your time, influence, bandwidth, and rhetorical capital on disparaging Google about its arguably trivial communications blunders instead of advancing the cause that you yourself purport to advocate?
Google had a terrific opportunity to make that case and shift public opinion in its (and I believe in the long term, everyone’s) favor.
Every tech press outlet has a similar opportunity, though smaller in scope. Why not talk about the part of this that actually matters? The only conclusion I can come to is that you're reflexively anti-Google.
What really confuses me about this whole thing is that no one seems to disagree that the patent system is broken. (Well, except maybe Nilay Patel.) So, if you agree with Google that the patent system needs some nontrivial amount of serious reform, why spend your time, influence, bandwidth, and rhetorical capital on disparaging Google about its arguably trivial communications blunders instead of advancing the cause that you yourself purport to advocate?
Google had a terrific opportunity to make that case and shift public opinion in its (and I believe in the long term, everyone’s) favor.
Every tech press outlet has a similar opportunity, though smaller in scope. Why not talk about the part of this that actually matters? The only conclusion I can come to is that you're reflexively anti-Google.
Am I wrong?