[mcantelon]

>Gruber is being consistent here: he doesn't like software patents

Funny that he doesn't say that in this post. Nothing like "I'm against software patents, but Google seems to play the software patent game when it suits them". Instead he says 'there are some who will argue that there are no “worthy patents”' which 1) implies he's not one of them and 2) conflates software patents with all types of patents.

>Google would actually have a moral high ground if they hadn't even bid for the Novell patents.

Google has the moral highground because, unlike Apple and others, they have not been suing people over software patents.

[halostatue]

Gruber's posts shouldn't be read in isolation -- and that applies to this post and his stance on software patents; agree with him or disagree with him, he has a narrative that is consistent[1] through DF and The Talk Show.

If you only read Gruber's posts that make it to HN, you're missing context because he may have made other posts that provide background (and, while Gruber's fairly good about linking back to what he's said in the past, he's not perfect).

If you only read Gruber's posts, you miss context that may have been building in comments he makes in his linked list entries. In fact, Gruber has mostly avoided saying anything about Lodsys because he has been linking to others that he feels have said what he believes more eloquently, adding a small paragraph of commentary.

I'm not claiming that Gruber's "perfect" by any means. I'm simply saying that Gruber has a narrative to what he writes that shouldn't be subjected to soundbite treatment.

With respect to Google, we must simply agree to disagree that they have a moral high ground on this and other matters. Gruber contends (and I mostly agree) that they do not for various reasons.

[1] I'd originally said remarkably consistent, but the only thing remarkable about that is that so many other journalists/bloggers aren't. This consistency, by the by, is also ignored by anyone who suggests that Gruber is an "uncritical fanboy". Over the last year, I can think of a number of posts where Gruber has criticized Apple fairly harshly over decisions that have been made, including the removal of "store" buttons from the Kindle and Kobo apps, etc.

[mcantelon]

>If you only read Gruber's posts, you miss context that may have been building in comments he makes in his linked list entries. In fact, Gruber has mostly avoided saying anything about Lodsys because he has been linking to others that he feels have said what he believes more eloquently, adding a small paragraph of commentary.

I think it's pretty normal to base criticisms of a blog post on the blog post itself rather than a complete reading of all of a blog's posts.