Jonathan Abbey
+
2
0
1
0
1
0
I'm Jon's complete lack of surprise.
Matt Cutts
Shared publicly -Florian Mueller, the patent analyst (he's not a lawyer) who often takes anti-Google stances, just revealed that Microsoft is funding Mueller to create a new study about patents.
Study on the worldwide use of FRAND-committed patents. Many of my consulting projects over the last few years have related to FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing obligations. The...
178
80
114 comments
Yllona Richardson
+
1
2
3
2
3
2
whoa, but not surprised either. i can't read his posts, they make me want to throw things.
Daniel Gray
+
1
2
1
2
1
I would like to fund a study about the adverse effect of Panda. Of course, I can't fund that study, since Panda is literally driving me into the ditch. I give up. Srsly. There's blood on the keyboard.
Johnny C
+
1
1
2
1
2
1
"... Microsoft has commissioned this study..." wow, did he work for Facebook too?
Franklin C
+
1
1
2
1
2
1
That explains his views against Google
cocker dunn
+
7
8
7
8
7
okay.... microsoft you are chicken.
Boye Oshin
+
1
5
6
5
6
5
Say it isn't so. GASP
I recently un-circled him. The obvious bias was getting in the way of the facts. Does anyone know of a good place to get updates on patent issues?
I recently un-circled him. The obvious bias was getting in the way of the facts. Does anyone know of a good place to get updates on patent issues?
hmmm.....
D.S. Deboer
+
5
6
5
6
5
Ah, when a man's livelihood depends on a certain opinion...
Ray Cromwell
+
4
5
4
5
4
Why am I not surprised.
Darko Vršič
+
3
4
3
4
3
It was obvious.
Michael Salinger
+
9
10
9
10
9
Mueller is nothing more than an anti-Google troll.
Maybe it's just a coincidence...right!
Duke Boles
+
1
2
1
2
1
yowzers.
Daniel R.
+
3
4
3
4
3
+Boye Oshin groklaw.net, obviously. I hope they'll be around for a long time to come!
Ian Dixon
+
3
4
3
4
3
hmmm interesting. Wait a minute....... isn't Microsoft a competitor to google??????? That brings up quite a few questions!
It's probably just a coincidence that he knew this about Microsoft
no comment.
Toby Johnson
+
6
7
6
7
6
Agree that his serious anti-Google slant can be frustrating, but unfortunately he also breaks these things down to a level & degree of detail that no one else does.
Jonathan O'Brien
+
1
6
7
6
7
6
He's on a social network and yet has commenting disabled on all of his posts. That's not social, that's Propaganda. It's about time he's been outed.
Brian Borman
+
3
4
3
4
3
wow I'm so glad you posted this. I was a little late to realizing how obscenely biased his posts are, but noticed how he conveniently disables comments on both g+ and his blog. clear sign that he can't defend what he says
Michael Martinez
+
2
3
2
3
2
I missed the part where he explains that all his past work was funded by Microsoft. Is there a reason to imply that he has been fronting for Microsoft all along?
Daniel Mery
+
1
4
5
4
5
4
Florian Meyer is a troll payed by Microsoft. Everybody know that.
Play nice Matt. We don't want another round of "who has the most ranking factors".
JE Roop
+
1
2
1
2
1
"I now look forward to this FRAND-related research project and thank everyone in advance for their input."
Ironic...or sardonic? I can never tell.
Ironic...or sardonic? I can never tell.
Daniel R.
+
2
3
2
3
2
+Michael Martinez Cutts worded this very cautiously. But you have to wonder why his close ties to MS shouldn't bear fruit in many more respects for him?! It's a pretty good explanation for his behavior.
Toby Johnson
+
5
6
5
6
5
Also didn't realize he's not a lawyer! Good to know.
JE Roop
+
1
3
4
3
4
3
Why be a lawyer when you can just pretend to be one?
+Florian Mueller should probably see this.
Brian Borman
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Per Abrahamsen If he had any interest, he'd allow comments on things.
Daniel Mealo
+
2
2
3
2
3
2
Florian Mueller does a good job of promoting Florian Mueller to tech journalists looking for an easy, sensational headline by quoting the latest from "Open Source Patent Blogger Florian Mueller" with no counterpoint, analysis, or journalistic fact-checking on their own.
When I see his name in a news article, I automatically scan down to see who else, if anyone, is quoted and usually stop reading from there. Then I wait a day for the inevitable correction article from someone who actually does know something about FLOSS, patents, and/or coding.
When I see his name in a news article, I automatically scan down to see who else, if anyone, is quoted and usually stop reading from there. Then I wait a day for the inevitable correction article from someone who actually does know something about FLOSS, patents, and/or coding.
Franklin C
+
9
10
9
10
9
+Florian Mueller should allow comments on g+ and or his blog.
Yano Tacchinardi
+
4
5
4
5
4
Now lets see this posted on http://techmeme.com as they pretty much post everything he writes anyway. The BBC quotes him aplenty as well, and of course the IDG properties. I'd like them to publish this detail.
OK +Danny Sullivan, you've seen STSS, right? http://shitthatsirisays.tumblr.com/
Brian Robbins
+
3
4
3
4
3
Reminiscent of studies by the Tobacco Institute ;-)
Pieter de Bruijn
+
1
2
1
2
1
Does everybody here know +Florian Mueller only uses an Android smartphone? His critical views are an important voice and if Google had listened better they might have had a better strategy to protect Android.
JE Roop
+
2
3
2
3
2
Interesting that a man so critical of others doesn't allow a voice against him on his self-indulgent blogs.
jaja
Kevin Lynch
+
2
3
2
3
2
Now that he's basically admitting he works for Microsoft. Does anybody think Microsoft friendly sites like BBC News will stop quoting the tool?
Matthew Wall
+
2
3
2
3
2
Fail....
Jose Fajardo
+
1
2
1
2
1
So he's not allowed to get paid for doing work ?!
Much like researches at universities getting grants from corporations don't get paid for researching on various fields ..
Last I looked the economy wasn't looking too good, a paid gig is a paid gig. And his previous posts are great alysis backed by fact, true they may not favour google BUT hey you googlers have pretty much been turning a blind eye to patents for the last several years, love it or hate it it's part of your industry. And it's comming back to bite you on your asses!
Well done to Florian for getting a paid gig !!
Much like researches at universities getting grants from corporations don't get paid for researching on various fields ..
Last I looked the economy wasn't looking too good, a paid gig is a paid gig. And his previous posts are great alysis backed by fact, true they may not favour google BUT hey you googlers have pretty much been turning a blind eye to patents for the last several years, love it or hate it it's part of your industry. And it's comming back to bite you on your asses!
Well done to Florian for getting a paid gig !!
To my knowledge, he never concealed he did work for (among other companies) Microsoft, this is not news and not scandalous/immoral. The guy is a consultant, it clearly says so on his home page.
You may not like or disagree on what he says on his blog about Google... that doesn't mean he's dishonest.
I agree it would be nice to be able to comment on his blog/g+ posts. But let's face it, the conversation would invariably become an insult fest (as this very post demonstrate) - so I must say I understand his decision to disable comments.
You may not like or disagree on what he says on his blog about Google... that doesn't mean he's dishonest.
I agree it would be nice to be able to comment on his blog/g+ posts. But let's face it, the conversation would invariably become an insult fest (as this very post demonstrate) - so I must say I understand his decision to disable comments.
Rahul Dhesi
+
8
9
8
9
8
Mueller cleverly mixes up facts, opinions, and speculation. This makes him dishonest, in my opinion. A reader of Mueller's blog can easily come away thinking something was fact when it was just opining or speculation.
Maybe readers need to learn how to... Read ;)
+Daniel Mealo, in all fairness to tech journalists, we should note that tech journalists do not quote Mueller, bloggers do.
John Clarke
+
1
2
1
2
1
Good - at least it's now out in the open...
And no one was surprised
Again: it was already "in the open", this is not a revelation, Mueller was never hiding working as a consultant for several tech companies.
Kieran Burke
+
2
3
2
3
2
It is funny that he uses blogger.
Steve Altneu
+
6
7
6
7
6
Mueller wrote a long article in the Guardian this week about the Oracle suit against Google and the Guardian did
not require any financial disclosure from Mueller. I believe this to be a dis-service to readers who expect the
author to declare any bias.
not require any financial disclosure from Mueller. I believe this to be a dis-service to readers who expect the
author to declare any bias.
Miguel de Icaza
+
1
0
1
0
1
0
Matt,
Could you comment on how you feel about Muller conducting a study on behalf of Microsoft on FRAND patents?
I find the subject fascinating because it seems that Google is about to buy Motorola for a bunch of patents, most of the interesting ones which have been pledged under FRAND terms. FRAND will do little to prevent the ongoing attacks from Apple and Microsoft patents as the patents they are asserting against Android are not FRAND-pledged.
An explanation of FRAND pledges is on Florian's blog post:
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/apple-says-samsung-has-abusively.html
Watching all the animosity towards Florian on this thread, I would love to know what exactly Florian has done that has got so many people upset at his work. He has become the go-to site for understanding what is happening on the mobile patent battles, a resource like no other, and if he is actually concealing critical information, distorting information or lying, I think we ought to know.
So far, the tweets today from Googlers were all innuendo and accusatory along the lines of "I knew it, he was payed all along", but there is little substance to support this.
This to me feels very un-Googly.
Could you comment on how you feel about Muller conducting a study on behalf of Microsoft on FRAND patents?
I find the subject fascinating because it seems that Google is about to buy Motorola for a bunch of patents, most of the interesting ones which have been pledged under FRAND terms. FRAND will do little to prevent the ongoing attacks from Apple and Microsoft patents as the patents they are asserting against Android are not FRAND-pledged.
An explanation of FRAND pledges is on Florian's blog post:
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/apple-says-samsung-has-abusively.html
Watching all the animosity towards Florian on this thread, I would love to know what exactly Florian has done that has got so many people upset at his work. He has become the go-to site for understanding what is happening on the mobile patent battles, a resource like no other, and if he is actually concealing critical information, distorting information or lying, I think we ought to know.
So far, the tweets today from Googlers were all innuendo and accusatory along the lines of "I knew it, he was payed all along", but there is little substance to support this.
This to me feels very un-Googly.
Hahah Typical Google!" Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh :'( "....... +Matt Cutts
Pavel Velinov
+
4
5
4
5
4
Doesn't that sound an awful lot like when you read about the latest research that tells you cigarettes are actually good for you, and then it turns out the study was sponsored by Phillip Morris
Michael Bruck
+
7
8
7
8
7
+Miguel de Icaza Müller is quoted in the press for his opinion, not his facts. The tech journalists don't care about the actual patents (for which Müller's blog is indeed the best source around), they only want to know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Given that Müller never seems to have come across a patent that he didn't like his opinion is predictably useless.
The Oracle trial provides plenty of opportunity for an analyst to comment on how broken the system is, see this trivial and obvious patent for an example: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110919133725832 . But Müller's opinions invariably tell us how Google flagrantly stole this and other "innovations".
The Oracle trial provides plenty of opportunity for an analyst to comment on how broken the system is, see this trivial and obvious patent for an example: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110919133725832 . But Müller's opinions invariably tell us how Google flagrantly stole this and other "innovations".
Ravi Nanavati
+
1
7
8
7
8
7
+Miguel de Icaza Let me try to break it down:
First, Florian has a history of, at best, willfully negligent wrongness related to patents, open source and, in particular, Android. Two examples that come to mind:
- How he endorsed and promoted the Bionic/GPL "controversy" (conveniently ignoring that the argument made against Bionic applied with equal force against glibc itself since glibc is LGPLed, not GPLed), brushing aside statements of intent from key people involved.
- Pushing the Linux kernel distribution rights termination FUD (that many Android manufacturers had effectively irreparably lost their rights to distribute the Linux kernel by not making timely source releases) again brushing aside repeated statements from relevant people that an appropriate source release would solve the problem. Here Florian failed to notice that Apple has exactly the same checkered history with WebKit source releases, so the consequences of the theory he was pushing would be ... dramatic, to say the least.
Florian has also shown plenty of bias in his writings. Two examples I can think of are:
- His long campaign of innuendo against PJ and Groklaw
- His recent opinion that Verizon's call for the President to set aside any adverse ITC decision against Samsung on public policy grounds was a dangerous to the rule of law and the first step on the road to a dictatorship (even though he is, in theory, personally opposed to software patents). Let me emphasize that: Florian's opinion is that President exercising the authority granted to him by the law (19 U.S.C. § 1337, if you're curious), to set aside ITC decisions on policy grounds is a threat to the rule of law because, um... He's free to have that opinion, but the rest of us are free to note that it is an incoherent and biased one.
As I'm sure you know, because of examples like these (and many others), Florian has been a controversial figure for quite some time and has been repeatedly asked to disclose his funding or to at least state that he wasn't funded by those who had an interested in spreading this sort of FUD. He never has, until now. Projects like this are not negotiated overnight. The question is no longer: "Does Florian Mueller have a financial interest in attacking Android?", but rather "How long has Florian Mueller been concealing a financial interest in attacking Android from journalists, his readers and the broader community?" You could conclude that it was only for the weeks or months required to negotiate this study, but given the whole history involved I think the most reasonable conclusion is: For a very, very long time.
First, Florian has a history of, at best, willfully negligent wrongness related to patents, open source and, in particular, Android. Two examples that come to mind:
- How he endorsed and promoted the Bionic/GPL "controversy" (conveniently ignoring that the argument made against Bionic applied with equal force against glibc itself since glibc is LGPLed, not GPLed), brushing aside statements of intent from key people involved.
- Pushing the Linux kernel distribution rights termination FUD (that many Android manufacturers had effectively irreparably lost their rights to distribute the Linux kernel by not making timely source releases) again brushing aside repeated statements from relevant people that an appropriate source release would solve the problem. Here Florian failed to notice that Apple has exactly the same checkered history with WebKit source releases, so the consequences of the theory he was pushing would be ... dramatic, to say the least.
Florian has also shown plenty of bias in his writings. Two examples I can think of are:
- His long campaign of innuendo against PJ and Groklaw
- His recent opinion that Verizon's call for the President to set aside any adverse ITC decision against Samsung on public policy grounds was a dangerous to the rule of law and the first step on the road to a dictatorship (even though he is, in theory, personally opposed to software patents). Let me emphasize that: Florian's opinion is that President exercising the authority granted to him by the law (19 U.S.C. § 1337, if you're curious), to set aside ITC decisions on policy grounds is a threat to the rule of law because, um... He's free to have that opinion, but the rest of us are free to note that it is an incoherent and biased one.
As I'm sure you know, because of examples like these (and many others), Florian has been a controversial figure for quite some time and has been repeatedly asked to disclose his funding or to at least state that he wasn't funded by those who had an interested in spreading this sort of FUD. He never has, until now. Projects like this are not negotiated overnight. The question is no longer: "Does Florian Mueller have a financial interest in attacking Android?", but rather "How long has Florian Mueller been concealing a financial interest in attacking Android from journalists, his readers and the broader community?" You could conclude that it was only for the weeks or months required to negotiate this study, but given the whole history involved I think the most reasonable conclusion is: For a very, very long time.
Ed Burnette
+
3
4
3
4
3
As much as I disagree with Florian, is it fair to say everything he has done and will do in the future is tainted by one contract for Microsoft? I hope people would give me a little slack if I did that.
And just to throw everyone off, he actually disclosed it. And of course that proves... well, who knows. Innuendo is enough.
JC Car
+
9
10
9
10
9
Florian writes what he's paid to write, it's that simple. If a higher bidder paid him to smear Microsoft, he'd be right on top of it. He also spams journalists, constantly. Just because he gets quoted a by some lazy journalists and bloggers doesn't automatically mean he's credible. He's not. His nonsense has been debunked so many times by PJ and Mark it's hilarious.
The folks at Google have every right to point it out. I imagine they're getting pretty tired of it, I know a lot of us have been tired of it for a very long time.
The folks at Google have every right to point it out. I imagine they're getting pretty tired of it, I know a lot of us have been tired of it for a very long time.
+JC Car He was commissioned for this one time,he's atleast credible in the sense that his posts elucidate the patent battles and He's been right in many cases. But you're right .. the gogglers do have the right to "Waaaaaaaahhhhh" :P ( thats what they do best! ). Should have thought about all this before infringing.
Ravi Nanavati
+
3
4
3
4
3
+Shibin c k If you think you can write a nontrivial, non-infringing piece of new software, you're welcome to try. I'll note that neither Apple (playlist patents) nor Microsoft (document/editing patents) has managed to pull that off.
+Ravi Nanavati I'd like to point out the leaked email which google is vehemently opposing to as evidence that says to go ahead with java illegitimately.
+Anthony John Infact u want people to believe that NoSoftwarePatents.com was a scam? and that People at RedHat,MySQL ,1&1 etc where idiots to sponsor him? That he battled hard against "the proposed directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions " by the EU has to be overlooked just because Google Fanboys/Girls are Offended?.. Calling a Spade a Spade != being a shill .......
For those Shills blinded by Google , Florian once fought hard against Microsoft ! He played a major role in keeping the system from getting worse through NoSoftwarePatents.com
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/European_Parliament_rejects_computer-implemented_inventions_directive
+JC Car last i checked he has more credibility than you. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2005/07/20/anti-patent-campaigner-hailed-as-ip-hero-39210059/
+Anthony John Infact u want people to believe that NoSoftwarePatents.com was a scam? and that People at RedHat,MySQL ,1&1 etc where idiots to sponsor him? That he battled hard against "the proposed directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions " by the EU has to be overlooked just because Google Fanboys/Girls are Offended?.. Calling a Spade a Spade != being a shill .......
For those Shills blinded by Google , Florian once fought hard against Microsoft ! He played a major role in keeping the system from getting worse through NoSoftwarePatents.com
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/European_Parliament_rejects_computer-implemented_inventions_directive
+JC Car last i checked he has more credibility than you. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2005/07/20/anti-patent-campaigner-hailed-as-ip-hero-39210059/
Matt Cutts
+
3
4
3
4
3
Miguel, as an engineer at Google, it's probably not a wise idea for me to speculate here on patent or FRAND issues. Sorry. :(
Michael Bruck
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Shibin c k In case you didn't notice, you advocated within your post first for and then against software patents.
Also interesting that you bring up that email, I never got how Müller on his blog concluded that an email from last summer that deals with options how to react to Oracle's lawsuit would be evidence that Google willfully infringed when it launched Android years earlier.
Also interesting that you bring up that email, I never got how Müller on his blog concluded that an email from last summer that deals with options how to react to Oracle's lawsuit would be evidence that Google willfully infringed when it launched Android years earlier.
Diganta Sarkar
+
1
2
1
2
1
I read Mueller's post on a regular basis. I keep the facts in head and reject opinions mostly. He writes about Android but not Microsoft vs i4i, why? There are plenty of Microsoft litigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation) to write about. I would also love to see an analysis of the patents those Microsoft claims Android is violating. It's obvious that he's being paid by someone to bias his writing :).
+Shibin c k -- Well, he was paid by RedHat to fight for FOSS, he did it. He's now fighting for Microsoft because he's getting paid by him. I have no issues with him. He's getting paid and writing in favor of someone - a typical lobbyist. What's wrong with this profession?
Rahul Dhesi
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Diganta Sarkar, I haven't seen anybody say above that anything is wrong with lobbying for pay as a profession. I think you changed the argument maybe without realizing it. Nobody is criticizing lobbyists in general. They are criticizing Mueller in particular.
Rahul Dhesi - Let me put it clearly - Mueller is a lobbyist and he's doing what he's being paid for. Why should we criticize him?
Rahul Dhesi
+
2
3
2
3
2
Mueller does not reveal how much of what he writes is funded to what extent by which parties. So he writes subjective nonsense with an aura of objectivity.
Rahul Dhesi - If he discloses, then he doesn't remain to be a lobbyist, does he? So, better ignore his opinions ...
Rahul Dhesi
+
1
2
1
2
1
I am already largely ignoring Mueller's opinions, after having concluded that he mostly provides distorted commentary. I'm more worried about your opinions, +Diganta Sarkar. Assuming you aren't paid to defend Mueller (and I have no reason to believe that you are), why do you defend him? Because you find him credible?
+Rahul Dhesi give and prove an instance where he distorted a commentry! otherwise stop spreading FUD and yes, people do find him credible.
OK +Shibin c k, lets have an agreement here. If I give you an instance of when Mueller provided incorrect information, will you agree in return to never again defend him? Do we have a deal?
Rahul Dhesi - I am not defending him neither did I say that he's credible. I am saying what he's doing is normal.
+Rahul Dhesi Do tell me so that i may know.But I give you no guarantees, coz its like asking u to stop using google to search if i prove that google search is broken !
Rahul Dhesi
+
2
3
2
3
2
You will have to give me a better incentive to spend the time and effort to demonstrate Mueller's errors. I don't want to preach to the converted, only to those who are willing to be converted. So far, I don't see anybody who is willing to change his mind about Mueller based on any arguments from me.
Miguel de Icaza
+
6
7
6
7
6
+Ravi Nanavati On the GPL/Bionic controversy, I know that "technically" the community has sided with "it is kosher", but I am among the people that were rubbed the wrong way by this "cleansing" process. If I have my source code "cleansed" of its GPL heritage in that way, I am bound to be pissed.
That reminds me of the one time a Gnome person ported the original KHTML code from C++ to C. It was not a line-by-line port, but a conceptual port, and in the process he forgot to copy the copyrights from the original code. This rightly pissed off the original authors. It was not a 1:1 copy, not an automated copy, it was even one /large step/ disconnected, but in the end, it was really a grey area. Why piss people off? The author apologized, and restored every copyright notice (this is GtkHtml as we know it today).
Taking sides on /that/ particular debate is a big fat grey area. So to claim that your "side" is right and this proves wrongdoing on Florian's side sounds partisan to me. This is not about "you are either with us or against us".
Bringing WebKit as a rationale for "others like Apple are doing it" is disingenuous. WebKit's history is fraught with controversy over hundreds of decisions that have annoyed people. I no longer remember how many times there was an uproar over Apple or WebKit doing the wrong thing.
Groklaw is an advocacy site with some shady practices like "sandboxing" comments they dislike:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/groklaw-accused-of-censorship/7826
I have been on the receiving end of their "digging for truth" and it did not feel like debating Noam Chomsky. It felt like being chased by a mob of zombies.
So there we have it, everything you have provided so far are not cases of distortion, lies, or missing information. We have a case of someone that you strongly disagree with, but instead of accepting that not everyone has the same opinions, the only possible explanation you can muster is "he must have been paid by Microsoft all along".
He has historically said that he is not being paid by Microsoft for his opinions, and this is the first time he discloses this. If I were him, I would not have taken the contract, because now I know that my grandfather was right when he told me "never do good things that appear bad". People are just too quick to attribute to malice what can easily be explained by different interests, like you.
That reminds me of the one time a Gnome person ported the original KHTML code from C++ to C. It was not a line-by-line port, but a conceptual port, and in the process he forgot to copy the copyrights from the original code. This rightly pissed off the original authors. It was not a 1:1 copy, not an automated copy, it was even one /large step/ disconnected, but in the end, it was really a grey area. Why piss people off? The author apologized, and restored every copyright notice (this is GtkHtml as we know it today).
Taking sides on /that/ particular debate is a big fat grey area. So to claim that your "side" is right and this proves wrongdoing on Florian's side sounds partisan to me. This is not about "you are either with us or against us".
Bringing WebKit as a rationale for "others like Apple are doing it" is disingenuous. WebKit's history is fraught with controversy over hundreds of decisions that have annoyed people. I no longer remember how many times there was an uproar over Apple or WebKit doing the wrong thing.
Groklaw is an advocacy site with some shady practices like "sandboxing" comments they dislike:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/groklaw-accused-of-censorship/7826
I have been on the receiving end of their "digging for truth" and it did not feel like debating Noam Chomsky. It felt like being chased by a mob of zombies.
So there we have it, everything you have provided so far are not cases of distortion, lies, or missing information. We have a case of someone that you strongly disagree with, but instead of accepting that not everyone has the same opinions, the only possible explanation you can muster is "he must have been paid by Microsoft all along".
He has historically said that he is not being paid by Microsoft for his opinions, and this is the first time he discloses this. If I were him, I would not have taken the contract, because now I know that my grandfather was right when he told me "never do good things that appear bad". People are just too quick to attribute to malice what can easily be explained by different interests, like you.
Anton Tikhonov
+
1
2
1
2
1
there is almost miraculous connection between...
"MOSAID Acquires 1,200 Nokia Standards-Essential Wireless Patents and 800 Wireless Implementation Patents"
"MOSAID will fund its acquisition of the portfolio through royalties from future licensing and enforcement revenues."
http://www.mosaid.com/corporate/news-events/releases-2011/110901.php
"We are pleased to have secured a license to the Nokia patents now acquired by MOSAID for Microsoft's products and services. In return, we have a passive economic interest in the revenue generated from the licensing of those patents to third parties...."
http://www.mosaid.com/corporate/news-events/releases-2011/110912.php
AND
"I am working on a study on the worldwide use of FRAND-pledged standards-essential patents in litigation and licensing."
"Microsoft has commissioned this study."
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/study-on-worldwide-use-of-frand.html
...isn't it?
"MOSAID Acquires 1,200 Nokia Standards-Essential Wireless Patents and 800 Wireless Implementation Patents"
"MOSAID will fund its acquisition of the portfolio through royalties from future licensing and enforcement revenues."
http://www.mosaid.com/corporate/news-events/releases-2011/110901.php
"We are pleased to have secured a license to the Nokia patents now acquired by MOSAID for Microsoft's products and services. In return, we have a passive economic interest in the revenue generated from the licensing of those patents to third parties...."
http://www.mosaid.com/corporate/news-events/releases-2011/110912.php
AND
"I am working on a study on the worldwide use of FRAND-pledged standards-essential patents in litigation and licensing."
"Microsoft has commissioned this study."
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/study-on-worldwide-use-of-frand.html
...isn't it?
Daniel R.
+
2
3
2
3
2
+Shibin c k Exempli gratia when he claimed to have "new" information on how Google sometimes picks exlusive partners for Android versions (it was known all along that Motorola had exclusive access to 2.0) and tried to spin it into shady practices by Google that he "revealed".
Daniel R.
+
6
7
6
7
6
+Miguel de Icaza Müller doesn't even allow comments. Why do you think that is? Of course he also states facts. But he distorts them. Btw groklaw as it is today seems fairly balanced to me. They are eager to point out a "compelling" argument by Oracle. To Müller, Google is always talking sh*t. To him they appear dumb, clueless, whatever.
+Daniel Rose There is substance debate whether Mueller's Blog is opinionated or not. But it is a cased closed thing and wise not to debate with someone who says Groklaw is "fairly balanced"........ heres a joke-I believe Groklaw is run by a certain guy who goes by the alias "Linux Geek" in the ZDNET forums.
Diganta Sarkar
+
4
5
4
5
4
The best way to know about any case is to read actual documents published by court. Groklaw writings directly link to them where Muellers writings cover his opinions. See the difference in today's publishing of Groklaw and Fosspatents. Groklaw links to all official documents, where Mueller covers mostly how "smart" Oracle's move is and how screwed Google looks like. He cherry picked one of Oracle's motions and same is true for Google. I used to believe mostly in his commentary till I discovered one of the motions issues by judge and read it thoroughly. Anyone wants to know in depth about Google vs Oracle should actually read this -
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2010cv03561/231846/230/
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2010cv03561/231846/230/
Lemuel Cantos
+
2
3
2
3
2
If +Florian Mueller opens his posts to comments, I'm gonna troll his posts :D
you guys might wanna check the discussion i've had with +Florian Mueller regarding this issue.
https://plus.google.com/110351160992477343545/posts/Z3rVL3bJyni
https://plus.google.com/110351160992477343545/posts/Z3rVL3bJyni
Alexander Ruoff
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Lemuel Cantos that's most likely why the comments of his posts are closed and I can fully understand that.
Mark Summerfield
+
3
4
3
4
3
What I find interesting about this 'revelation' is that Mueller appears not only to be telling us that he is performing this FRAND research for Microsoft, but that he has also worked for Microsoft on previous occasions:
'Microsoft appreciates and respects a diversity of opinions, a fact that has enabled us to work together not only on this FRAND research project but also on a couple of other recent issues facing the industry.'
This is a change from his former 'neither confirm nor deny' line (see debate in comments to http://techrights.org/2010/08/06/record-straight-on-groklaw-ibm).
I am also interested that he is asking for free contributions of information via his contact form. Presumably he is hoping that he will receive, amongst other things, the inside story on disputes and negotiations that never made it onto the public record. Now why would anybody give him that for free, when he is using it to earn money off Microsoft? And even if he does receive such information, how will he corroborate it? And how will he account for the fact that his sample of cases is unrepresentative (i.e. 'voluntary response bias')? Or that information provided by insiders who are at least breaching basic standards of professional ethics, and probably the confidentiality of their employers or clients, is not inherently especially trustworthy? Not sure that this meets the standards of 'research'...
'Microsoft appreciates and respects a diversity of opinions, a fact that has enabled us to work together not only on this FRAND research project but also on a couple of other recent issues facing the industry.'
This is a change from his former 'neither confirm nor deny' line (see debate in comments to http://techrights.org/2010/08/06/record-straight-on-groklaw-ibm).
I am also interested that he is asking for free contributions of information via his contact form. Presumably he is hoping that he will receive, amongst other things, the inside story on disputes and negotiations that never made it onto the public record. Now why would anybody give him that for free, when he is using it to earn money off Microsoft? And even if he does receive such information, how will he corroborate it? And how will he account for the fact that his sample of cases is unrepresentative (i.e. 'voluntary response bias')? Or that information provided by insiders who are at least breaching basic standards of professional ethics, and probably the confidentiality of their employers or clients, is not inherently especially trustworthy? Not sure that this meets the standards of 'research'...
Jack Schofield
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Mark Summerfield If you're an analyst you work for whoever offers to pay you enough money for it to be worth the effort. If you think that means you agree with your clients' views then you are deranged. +Matt Cutts is basically trolling for fanboy support and it's a cheap trick. If Google wants to pay +Florian Mueller an appropriate sum for an equivalent independent analysis, then I'd be surprised if he wouldn't do it. That's how these things work. Companies buy your time, they don't buy your opinions.
Lemuel Cantos
+
2
3
2
3
2
+Jack Schofield that's kind of hard to believe. If Mueller wasn't paid by Microsoft and his articles really are his own opinion, he must be a very stupid, arrogant, and stubborn person.
Jack Schofield
+
2
3
2
3
2
+Lemuel Cantos If you find that hard to believe then that's your problem. It's called ignorance. From your reply, you sound like a very stupid, arrogant, and stubborn person.
The fact that you don't agree with +Florian Mueller's views doesn't mean he's wrong, and even if/when he's wrong, he's perfectly entitled to his views.
The fact that you don't agree with +Florian Mueller's views doesn't mean he's wrong, and even if/when he's wrong, he's perfectly entitled to his views.
Mr. Cutts, IMO, you should articulate what's in your mind about the opinions/writings of Mueller as much as possible (upon obtaining of formal approval of Google, the company), instead of insinuating something, especially because most people recognize you're the man of integrity -- we, Japanese, still remembers your decision to voluntarily downgrade google.co.jp a few years ago-- and also very influential, whose name and remarks are often quoted on the books/mag articles about Google.
+Jack Schofield and by insulting me, you sound like you're pretty stupid, arrogant and stubborn yourself.
Cheers ;)
Cheers ;)
Chan Li
+
1
2
1
2
1
why people anti google ,google is so awesome
Richard Lawler
+
1
2
1
2
1
Shocked! I am shocked to learn that Florian Mueller is being funded by Microsoft.
This is really cowardly of you, +Matt Cutts . If you're going to insinuate something here, go ahead and do it instead of having your fanboy brigade do it for you. Don't throw it out there, knowing exactly what your followers will do with it, then hide behind your job title when someone calls you on it. A title which seems more these days to be Google Damage Control or Google Propaganda Team rather than Google Webspam Team or Search Results QA (1,000 pardons, but I forget and have to run rather than look up the official title.)
Being paid by Microsoft is better than being paid by Google, or so it seems. Else why would you be so envious?
Also, I must admit this post is so very mature and Google-ish, blaming unrelated people for your faults with Android.
Also, I must admit this post is so very mature and Google-ish, blaming unrelated people for your faults with Android.
Camilo Alvarez
+
2
3
2
3
2
For alternatives look at groklaw.
Will Hill
+
2
3
2
3
2
+Jack Schofield there's a term for doing something dirty that you don't really agree with for money, "whore," but you are right about one thing. It's difficult to tell what Florian thinks because he contradicts himself regularly on behalf of his clients. +Matt Cutts has not played a cheap trick here, he's pointed out something important. Previously, Florian refused to either confirm or deny that Microsoft was paying him. Now we know, thanks Matt, and we can blame Microsoft for his malice.
Techrights and Groklaw have written about how poor or misguided a spokesman Florian is, but it's not the details and double talk that matter most. Here are a few examples for the interested.
http://techrights.org/2011/10/15/quanta-and-microsoft-lobbyists/
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20091204095942328
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20091021164738392
The main problem with Florian is that he's malicious astroturf. He pretended to be a FOSS advocate and software patent opponent while doing the opposite. Along the way, he convinced a few journalists that his software views are common in free software circles and his legal views were common in legal circles or at least the reasonable and impartial circles. He attacked real free software advocates in vile and dishonest ways which got less careful journalist to repeat his libel, piling insults on top of the injury of misrepresentation. It was really outrageous to see his nonsense splashed around major publications.
It's not worth going into the details now that he's exposed himself. Journalists won't bother to quote him as anything but a Microsoft PR person now. Just about no one should take his legal opinions seriously. Those that present him as what he pretends to be will expose themselves as either sloppy or something more like Florian himself.
Apologies to the sex trade.
Techrights and Groklaw have written about how poor or misguided a spokesman Florian is, but it's not the details and double talk that matter most. Here are a few examples for the interested.
http://techrights.org/2011/10/15/quanta-and-microsoft-lobbyists/
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20091204095942328
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20091021164738392
The main problem with Florian is that he's malicious astroturf. He pretended to be a FOSS advocate and software patent opponent while doing the opposite. Along the way, he convinced a few journalists that his software views are common in free software circles and his legal views were common in legal circles or at least the reasonable and impartial circles. He attacked real free software advocates in vile and dishonest ways which got less careful journalist to repeat his libel, piling insults on top of the injury of misrepresentation. It was really outrageous to see his nonsense splashed around major publications.
It's not worth going into the details now that he's exposed himself. Journalists won't bother to quote him as anything but a Microsoft PR person now. Just about no one should take his legal opinions seriously. Those that present him as what he pretends to be will expose themselves as either sloppy or something more like Florian himself.
Apologies to the sex trade.
Will Hill
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Ravi Nanavati Nicely put, but Florian's writings about what he called "Groklie" were not innuendo they were outright libel.
For a more positive view of Florian Mueller and his work, see:
http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=a6495ba8-2b83-4909-88e2-3ae2ff316dd8
http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=a6495ba8-2b83-4909-88e2-3ae2ff316dd8
Nate Silverman
+
1
2
1
2
1
iam - Intellectual Asset Management 15 October 2011
"Mueller is not and never will be a corporate player: he calls things as he sees them and does not pull his punches."
"Knowing Mueller the research will no doubt form the basis of a thorough report that will be well worth reading."
"Mueller is not and never will be a corporate player: he calls things as he sees them and does not pull his punches."
"Knowing Mueller the research will no doubt form the basis of a thorough report that will be well worth reading."
Daniel Kerr
+
2
3
2
3
2
Florian Muller is a paid Microsoft lobbyist.
he ignores lots of prior art that could be found with quick google searches.
if you want to get the real information on patents checkout http://www.groklaw.net.
for example look at all the evidence showing oracle patents are invalid due to prior art here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111003170846784
the same with htc vs apple. he acts like the patents are valid and completely misleads people.
Look here:
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/these-tables-show-how-android-infringes.html
search for regex. regex (regular expression has been around for 60 years). its used to match patterns in data. its what apple use to prove android infringes its patents. yet this idiot never bothers to mention this. any programmer worth his salt would have used known this. its used for matching web addresses and emails in plain text emails and turns them into hyper links.
The web site is called FOSS but he actually is telling people software patent licensing is good and everyone should have a microsoft patent agreement? is he F***ED
also notice how he does not have comments on his blog?
he ignores lots of prior art that could be found with quick google searches.
if you want to get the real information on patents checkout http://www.groklaw.net.
for example look at all the evidence showing oracle patents are invalid due to prior art here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111003170846784
the same with htc vs apple. he acts like the patents are valid and completely misleads people.
Look here:
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/07/these-tables-show-how-android-infringes.html
search for regex. regex (regular expression has been around for 60 years). its used to match patterns in data. its what apple use to prove android infringes its patents. yet this idiot never bothers to mention this. any programmer worth his salt would have used known this. its used for matching web addresses and emails in plain text emails and turns them into hyper links.
The web site is called FOSS but he actually is telling people software patent licensing is good and everyone should have a microsoft patent agreement? is he F***ED
also notice how he does not have comments on his blog?
Jack Schofield
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Will Hill You're welcome to your view, and +Florian Mueller is welcome to his. I'll take his over yours, because anyone who quotes the badly researched and ludicrously bigoted Techrights hate-site has no credibility at all. You can get better information from gutters.
Will Hill
+
2
3
2
3
2
Surely, +Jack Schofield, you respect the people at Groklaw who say almost exactly the same things about Florian as Techrights? You would not want to quote a paid PR person as an impartial expert, would you? A lot of people are trying to tell you something here.
I think all Florian wants is a few peanuts (confidential) from Google's direction :)
Matt Cutts
+
3
4
3
4
3
+Jack Schofield , more of this story is trickling out. See http://paidcontent.org/article/419-is-patent-expertblogger-florian-mueller-getting-too-cozy-with-microsoft/ where Mueller says that "he and Microsoft have worked together more than once, but that because of a confidentiality agreement with the company, he can’t elaborate on the details of that relationship."
So at this point, Mueller hasn't fully disclosed his funding sources. But this most recent article shows that it's not just that Mueller is getting new funding from Microsoft; he's also "worked together" Microsoft multiple times in the past as well.
I really wasn't trying to "troll for fanboy support" with this post; in my experience, Mueller has been consistently critical of Google in his writing, so I wanted to get his Microsoft funding on the record.
So at this point, Mueller hasn't fully disclosed his funding sources. But this most recent article shows that it's not just that Mueller is getting new funding from Microsoft; he's also "worked together" Microsoft multiple times in the past as well.
I really wasn't trying to "troll for fanboy support" with this post; in my experience, Mueller has been consistently critical of Google in his writing, so I wanted to get his Microsoft funding on the record.
Will Hill
+
1
2
1
2
1
Good catch, +Matt Cutts. Florian has been dodging this question for more than a year, even when asked directly. Watch him in comments here:
http://techrights.org/2010/08/06/record-straight-on-groklaw-ibm/
He claimed at the time, "Concerning Microsoft, I absolutely adhere to the EU’s transparency rules and if I ever had to announce anything, I would do so." If now admits he's "worked" with Microsoft before, did he really adhere to the rules then? Given his treatment of Groklaw, IBM and Google, the source of his funding seemed obvious. Techrights has an index if anyone is curious about those opinions.
http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Florian_Müller
http://techrights.org/2010/08/06/record-straight-on-groklaw-ibm/
He claimed at the time, "Concerning Microsoft, I absolutely adhere to the EU’s transparency rules and if I ever had to announce anything, I would do so." If now admits he's "worked" with Microsoft before, did he really adhere to the rules then? Given his treatment of Groklaw, IBM and Google, the source of his funding seemed obvious. Techrights has an index if anyone is curious about those opinions.
http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Florian_Müller
I'm not seeing any comments from you, Matt, which show where Florian's factually inaccurate. If you're going to be accusing someone of being a paid shill - and that's what you're not-so-subtly hinting at - some evidence of where they have distorted facts would be at least wise.
Hahaha, probably the funding is making it official that he is going to be anti-Google on paper. hahaha. Good share +Matt Cutts :)
Over the years i have found that anything Florian Mueller says is so twisted by self/paid interests he is not even worth reading
Max Huijgen
+
3
4
3
4
3
Ah that explains a lot! I was blocked a long time ago by Florian so wasn´t even aware about his recent activities. I write about patents once in a while but I never understood what he had to say on the subject. It´s clear he is not a lawyer, nor technical but he produces a lot of FUD and the worst thing he is quoted all over the place by now.
Good to know he is indeed on an agenda.
Good to know he is indeed on an agenda.
Mervin Mokhatu
+
2
3
2
3
2
Guys lets just all move to http://www.groklaw.net/ u have found them to be more consistent with their analysis of patent disputes. I have read foss's blog for over a year and many times his predictions have been wrong and if he is in the wrong he always changes the topic in his articles to some other android OEM case. All we asking for is consistency in his reporting. Let apples be apples and not be counted as oranges.
Gábor Berényi
+
3
4
3
4
3
I ditched him from my news reader after becoming more and more suspicious and finally encountering this: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/04/19/1357207/florian-mueller-outs-himself-as-oracle-employee. Can we stop him from blogging his lies?
Read his latest post where the judge did not allow oracle to add their 702 patent. rather then focusing on the facts at hand he writes a whole blog post about how oracle can still use the patent later. He only takes portions of the court order that benefits oracle or apple or microsoft. +Florian Mueller guy is useless and a hypocrite.
Jeshurun Daniel
+
1
2
1
2
1
+Boye Oshin Try groklaw.net
Add a comment...