Considering there was some reportedly actual evidence and that Google chose to settle despite their massive funds to sustain a possible series of trials, I'm kind of disappointed the smaller group didn't win this time. Just to stick one in the eye of Google. Sure, it wouldn't do much; they'd probably just buy out the smaller company outright and recoup their losses that way later on.
Some scientists discussed things, big whoop. It plays well with jurors against google but I don't see that much value in it from what is being described at least. Another problem I find here is, though we're talking about dedicated chips for machine learning, it's basically an algorithm and it seems to me awfully close to patenting code.
There's a simple litmus test I like to think of in cases of patents like this, it may sound harsh and unfair but is usually not that bad a metric imo: if the technology google is alleged to have infringed upon is that relevant and unique how come no one ever heard of Singular Computing and they aren't a billion dollar player in this market? And when you say "smaller group", by all accounts this is a one man company, probably created for tax reasons and appearances (makes the guy sound more credible at conferances).
It's not the type of patent troll we're used to, but still seems like a trollish dispute.
