Google has shown such "entitlement" on many occasions. Take, for one example, their idea that they are entitled to not pay Sonos for their technology which just came back to bite them. Of course it was Google's customers who ended up getting the short end of the stick.
> their idea that they are entitled to not pay Sonos for their technology
Might want to research that one. Sonos “technology” here is the idea that multiple speakers can be adjusted by one knob… but the knob happens to be software.
You're right. There are 5 garbage patents instead of one.
> 9195258: System and method for synchronizing operations among a multiplicity of digital data processing devices that are separately clocked
I am struggling to see merit. It reads like "devices can play music in sync if you send them the timing info" which is not novel. Maybe I'm missing something, but I am doubtful. The patent system is full of garbage and patents are written to be obtuse on purpose.
> 10209953: Playback device
The abstract is literally identical to the previous patent word for word. I don't think this should at all be considered a separate patent. Partly because the claims seem like garbage, but mostly because it's just more of the same from the first. This is written to be almost impossible to parse, but the first claim in English is "two devices on a LAN can connect and coordinate playback based on one device's clock". It's NTP. Sorry, it's "NTP, plus audio".
> 8588949: Method and apparatus for adjusting volume levels in a multi-zone system
One knob, multiple speakers. Old idea. Every smart home app has exactly this same concept for lights and speaker systems have done this for decades without the software. It is not novel.
> 9219959: Multi-channel pairing in a media system
Jesus Christ. "You can use multiple speakers to play multiple audio channels." It is not novel that your speakers can be "smart".
> 10439896: Playback device connection
Ugh. "You can use your phone to add a device."
None of this stuff is novel. The last one seems the most novel, but also not valid because it essentially describes part of the WPS protocol, but using an app instead of a router button.
I don't see that it's "entitlement" to think these are garbage. The software industry giants have fought a long time for the patent office to acknowledge software patents that are not actually novel. I honestly hope this crap starts to hurt them more and maybe they'll start pushing for reform. But probably not because the primary effect is to harm smaller competitors.
