At least in this case the innovations/patents are for actual hardware rather than mathematical formulas.

Not necessarily. I would think that Motorola is as capable at filing for bogus patents as other companies, and it would be odd if they had only filed for patents on hardware. Especially if and when they saw significant value in their patent portfolio; why wouldn't you file for easiest ones you can get? Surely they have filed for all kinds of patents, including (but not limited to) hardware ones. It would be nice to get a breakdown of types of patents, as well as years they were applied for; it seems that the trend for bogus patents has been increasing... so older patents may be bit less likely to be bs ones.

I'd just like to point out its not much of a defense if you don't enforce your ownership at some level.

Usually defensive here means using patent lawsuits in defensive way (against other companies suing you); not so much defending patents themselves. There is no need to defend patents, per se, unless someone is specifically trying to get them invalidated. As in not initiating the court process, but responding.

Gosling did a piss poor job on the design and evolution of Java to begin with.

How so? I thought it was generally consider a pretty decent job, and not just due to actual success of the platform and language. While Java has its quirks like any other programming language, it seems pretty well-rounded and practical. Your statement would suggest much more than that, so what exact things back up your statement?

I agree in that Gosling's checking of codebase is probably not all that valuable in itself (as he can't really be external objective third-party here), but I think it can have positive effect for credibility of Google's defense. It's not about trying to prevent Oracle from suing, but rather in improving chances of winning, or limiting damages. Gosling is obviously knowledgeable on Java and history, but also about various litigations related to Java.

Thats because the America Revolution wasn't "domestic terrorism".

Many techniques used were in fact labelled as terrorism even back then. And if one uses current de-facto political definitions (as various governments, including some western ones, do), could be construed to be such: guerilla warfare, vandalism, theft, obstruction of legal system...This does not diminish value or righteousness of revolution, just points out dangers of using a label without context; and especially fallacy of equating current laws with moral.

So: given that american colonies were part of English rule, and many activities were criminal (thanks to malevolent laws etc), yes, much of it was technically domestic terrorism. And no, there was nothing wrong with that; due to corruptness of the (legal, political) system of the time.

And why would an office suite have an email reader? Just because Microsoft thought it a good idea doesn't mean it is...

While it is true that underdogs typically use more of dirty tactics (since they have to, for the most part), how does this absolve either side? Two wrongs do not make right; so as wrong and deplorable as it is to use human shields, it is at least as bad to shoot those children. This is what I do not understand, except maybe as indication of mental maturity level of person arguing the case -- it is a kindergarten kid argument ("but he started it!").

Forget for a moment about the irony of bickering over "ownership" of stolen documents.

"Stolen" should be in quotes -- it may unauthorized copying, but as far as I know, original owners still have said documents and what Wikileaks has are copies.

This may sound like nitpicking but it has real life implications, whatwith MPAA's "pirate" labeling of unauthorized copying and other incidents where owners of "intellectual property" are abusing legal system.

I find Android slow, clunky, and Java-based SDK's (like Eclipse and the Blackberry dev environment) to be the same - where XCode is smoothe and elegant

Really? I have not used XCode heavily, but from my colleagues who have, they all swear XCode is biggest pile of crap they have ever used. I am pretty ok with Eclipse in general, but Android plug-in has always been shaky whenever I have had to use it (to help others work around issue Android platform causes with normally well functioning java libs). So I can see why it might make life bit more difficult.

I suspect there is lots of inertia both ways; those who start with obj-C, XCode find it much more appealing than those going the other way. But still... my impression has been that XCode and obj-C both feel bit antiquated, all things considered, which is in odd contrast with modern sleek design of the phone and hardware itself.

Right, I believe the term used is "fishing expedition".