Google發射飛彈反擊Rockstar !

Google訴請確認未侵害Rockstar專利的訴狀

Google sues to protect Android device makers from Apple-backed patent hell (GigaOM)


Rockstar真是個熱門話題。暨傳出它打算出售自己的專利之後，目前最新的發展，是Google跳出來對Rockstar發射飛彈了：Google在北加州起訴，請法院確認Google沒有侵害Rockstar用來控告Android廠商侵權的那幾篇專利。

這個訴狀有幾個可以探討的地方。

首先，要提Declaratory Judgement，要件之一是原被告之間要有 "controversy"，不是想提就提。這個法律問題我不是很懂，不過Google在起訴狀的第一段，嘗試回答了這個問題：

1. ... Rockstar’s litigation campaign has placed a cloud on Google’s Android platform; threatened Google’s business and relationships with its customers and partners, as well as its sales of Nexus-branded Android devices; and created a justiciable controversy between Google and Rockstar.

所以看起來，就算Rockstar沒有直接找上Google，但由於Rockstar的動作 "在Android平台上罩了一片烏雲"，所以這就算是跟Google之間有controversy了。好吧，這聽起來好像也說的通。

其次，在解釋為什麼北加州法院對本案有對人管轄權的時候，Google很明顯地認為，理由之一是在背後為Rockstar操盤者，是Apple這個加州公司：

8. ... On information and belief, Rockstar’s shareholders direct and participate in Rockstar’s licensing and enforcement efforts against companies in California. For example, Apple Inc. (“Apple”) is a large shareholder in closely-held Rockstar, and maintains a seat on Rockstar’s board of directors. Rockstar’s CEO has publicly stated that Rockstar maintains regular contact with its shareholders. Apple’s headquarters are in Cupertino, California.

此外，Google也聲稱Rockstar嘗試讓加州公司不要用Android平台，干涉了Google的商業關係。哇，這個指控好像有專利濫用的問題在裡面喔：

9. ... On information and belief, Rockstar contacted and met with these California-based companies in order to discourage them from continuing to use Google’s Android platform in their devices, and to interfere with Google’s business relationships.

還有，大家記得當年包括Apple在內的幾家公司，是用45億美金標下北電的專利的嗎？依這份訴狀，其中Apple就出了26億 (真有錢啊)：

13. In June 2011, five of the world’s largest technology companies—including Google competitors Apple, Research In Motion, and Microsoft—joined forces to obtain a portfolio of patents auctioned during the bankruptcy of Nortel Networks. Bankrolled by these companies, a manufactured entity called “Rockstar Bidco” placed the winning bid of $4.5 billion. According to Apple’s June 2011 Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Apple contributed “approximately $2.6 billion” of that sum.

最後，當年天價標出的原因，是大家認為北電網路的專利跟3G與4G相關。但是Rockstar現在拿出來起訴的專利，好像跟3G或4G是完全沒關係。比如US 5,838,551這篇，其實是跟EMI遮蔽技術相關：

29. In the Android OEM Actions, Rockstar accuses Android OEM defendants ASUS, HTC, Huawei, LG, Pantech, and Samsung of infringing the ’551 patent in that each “makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, imports, exports, supplies and/or distributes within the United States” devices incorporating Google’s Android platform, which devices allegedly include “at least one electronic package comprising a component that is located between an EMI shield and a ground member for performing shielding operations” where “[t]he EMI shield is incorporated into the electronic package, which is then mounted to a circuit board” in the accused devices. In its complaint against ASUS, which manufactures the Nexus 7, Rockstar specifically accuses the Nexus 7, a device offered for sale by Google.

值得注意的是，雖然這跟Android應該沒有什麼關聯，但Rockstar仍只挑Android產品打。當然，我們也可以說這只是Rockstar的訴訟策略：Nexus 7只是起訴用的產品而已，隨著訴訟的進行，Rockstar會陸續加入其它非Android的產品。

至於其它的專利與什麼技術相關，依訴狀的內容整理如下：

• US 5,838,551：電磁干擾遮蔽
• US 6,037,937：檢視不動產用的圖形使用者介面 (navigable graphical user interface (‘navigable GUI’) that permits a user to manipulate and control the contents of the display to maximize the use of display real estate.)
• US 6,128,298：行動熱點 (Mobile Hotspot functionality [which] is designed to route data packets between wireless devices tethered to the Mobile Hotspot to nodes on a public network such as the Internet.)
• US 6,333,973：整合訊息中心 (integrated notification message center.)
• US 6,463,131：訊息與通知功能 (Messaging and Notification functionality.)
• US 6,765,591：VPN的管理功能 (VPN management functionality.)
• US 6,937,572：定位服務功能 (Location Services functionality.)

由以上可以看出，這些專利全都跟3G與4G通信沒有關係，而是跟行動裝置的特定功能，或甚至跟硬體設計相關。難怪之前傳出Rockstar要賣專利時，有消息指出打算賣的專利跟現在起訴Android陣營的專利無關。可能買家還是對工業標準相關專利比較有興趣吧。

除了訴狀之外，這個訴訟本身也有幾個點可以觀察。

首先，Google並不是參加Rockstar發起的那些專利侵權訴訟，而是自己發起一個新的確認之訴。那麼這個訴訟跟原本的訴訟，會發生哪些關聯性就值得觀察。比如說，原本的訴訟會不會暫停，等這個確認之訴的結果呢？這些訴訟會不會被合併呢？這就要看各家廠商的訴訟策略了。

還有，Google沒有直接參加Rockstar發起的那些專利侵權訴訟，原因有可能是因為Google提供了Android程式碼，卻不負任何專利侵權擔保責任。(這是不是寫在GPL裡面？我有點忘了。) 所以Google不需要直接參與多個訴訟 (這樣律師費很多)，直接起一個新的訴訟就好 (律師費低的多)，下游廠商們也沒有辦法把Google告進來 (比如這件)。唉，這就是產業的現實吧。

再者，產品是否侵權的判斷，跟產品本身的設計有關。如果侵權與否的關鍵不在Android本身，那麼這個訴訟可能就對被Rockstar起訴的被告們幫助有限。比如說，EMI遮蔽設計侵不侵權，其實跟Android本身一點關係都沒有；又比如其實專利侵權的重點，是在Android上層的，廠商自己開發的APP上，廠商又不願意揭露程式碼給Google。就這兩種狀況，Google這個訴訟對廠商的幫助，可能就不大了。

最後，對於某些把Android拿去改，進而開發出了自己的作業系統的廠商，Google應該就不會這樣力挺。因此Google也藉此釋放出一個訊息：我只會力挺用我所開發出來的Android的廠商，不會理利用Android去改出自己作業系統的廠商。(不過話又說回來，Rockstar也沒在理那些利用Android去改出自己作業系統的廠商就是了。)

總而言之，Google說的故事是，Rockstar是由大股東Apple在背後操盤，拿跟Android不直接相關的專利來攻擊Android陣營，目的為擾亂Android的生意運作，所以我現在出來主張Android其實沒有侵害這些專利，來力挺我的合作夥伴。這策略是否會成功，讓我們繼續觀察下去吧。