InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 80
Posts 3532
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/04/2012

Re: Justice98 post# 31892

Wednesday, 04/17/2013 8:28:15 AM

Wednesday, April 17, 2013 8:28:15 AM

Post# of 68424
SteveKimLaw Apr 17 01:30 AM

It should go without saying, but I would urge you not to take QE at their word. They are lawyers, paid to create and advocate legal positions.

Thus, when they say they have created a workaround, my knee jerk reaction is that they have made some "changes" to the code that most likely either (1) don't alter the infringement analysis; or (2) sacrifice ad matching efficiency.

Worse (for Google), their alleged workaround could do both, i.e., cause poorer results and still infringe. Remember, there is a reason that Google themselves in their own internal memos referred to their own system as "DumbAds" (sic) and Vringo's system as "SmartAds" (sic). Remember, not long ago, Google and QE were stamping their feet and insisting their system didn't infringe. Do you really think they have invented a better mousetrap? Just because QE says so?