The Register®

Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/19/google_bt_bah_humbug/

BT's gift to Google: A patent war over ads and Android

Music, Maps, Adwords and mobile OS land Google in court

By Andrew Orlowski

Posted in Developer, 19th December 2011 11:01 GMT

Watch Now : Virtual Machine Movement with Hyper-V

It's open season now. BT is the latest company to sue Google, alleging patent infringement, but this latest barrage extends beyond Google's Android software - it touches to other Google services too. These include maps, music, social networking and its advertising services, including Adwords, claims BT.

Although only the six are mentioned - which is not untypical for an opening salvo - it appears BT has chosen the carefully to encompass a broad range of Google services and business areas as possible. Google+ and Offers even merit a mention.

BT has filed the suit [1] in a Delaware court and alleges that six patents are violated. These are: USPTO 6,151,309 (the 'Busuoic' patent); 6,169,515 ('Mannings'); 6,397,040 ('Titmuss 1'); 6,578,079 ('Gittins'); 6,650,284 ('Mannings 2'); and 6,826,598 ('Titmuss 2').

The IP protected by these six, says BT, can be used to stream music over low-bandwidth connections, provide route guidance and produce location-based shortlists. The telco claims this technology is used by Google Maps and Adwords. Titmuss 1 describes location-based advertising services, directions and other services that are alleged used by Android market and Google Books.

Barely any area of Google's business is untouched by the six - except possibly Google's Space Elevator [2].

A neutral may feel that this is a confrontation in which both sides, given past form, deserve to lose.

In 2000, BT filed lawsuits against US ISPs claiming they violated an old patent on hyperlinks. It gave up [3] in 2002 after a judge ruled that the 1976 Hidden Page patent [4] didn't cover the infringement claim.

On the eve of its 2004 IPO Google had to pay Yahoo! a substantial settlement for vital IP relating to its core money-making asset: context-based keywords. With Android, Google rushed to market without sweeping for patent mines by performing due diligence checks, and then refused to indemnify [5] its partners. This has given Google, and its partners, a pile of avoidable headaches and legal costs. And Google lobbies hard to weaken IP protection in overseas countries, threatening the local tax base [6], where it makes little fiscal contribution [7] of its own.

A bully and a scofflaw? A cynic might be tempted to conclude that the two deserve each other. ®