"Oracle Corporation opposes the patentability of software. The Company believes that existing copyright law and available trade secret protections, as opposed to patent law, are better suited to protecting computer software developments.
Patent law provides to inventors an exclusive right to new technology in return for publication of the technology. This is not appropriate for industries such as software development in which innovations occur rapidly, can be made without a substantial capital investment, and tend to be creative combinations of previously-known techniques.

Even if patent law were appropriate for protection of software, due to the large volume of recently-granted software patents and the rising number of new applications, the current patent process would continue to be troublesome for the software industry. Software patent examinations are hindered by the limited capability of searching prior art, by the turnover rate among examiners in the Patent and Trademark Office, and by the confusion surrounding novelty and innovation in the software arena. The problem is exacerbated by varying international patent laws, which both raise the cost and confuse the issue of patent protection.

Unfortunately, as a defensive strategy, Oracle has been forced to protect itself by selectively applying for patents which will present the best opportunities for cross-licensing between Oracle and other companies who may allege patent infringement."

A statement against patenting software from no other than Oracle, before they sued Google. So in principle even they think software patents are all bad, but when they stand to make billions of dollars, they suddenly have a change of heart, and they want to abuse the patent system just like any other patent troll out there.

Why should Google be the only ones to open-source all their patents right now? So they can be even more vulnerable against other companies? Didn't they open-source Android and other companies still found ways to sue them? What's to stop Microsoft from suing Google on search related patents after they open source theirs? Because I'm sure Microsoft has some search patents, too, but if Google open sources theirs, how will they be able to ensure that "mutual -assured destruction" balance if they don't own any patents anymore?

This can't be just one-sided. Either everyone loses their patents, or they keep going as it is, and try to gather as many patents as possible to ensure they don't get sued over bogus patents.

EDIT: And what corporation doesn't use their profits to enter a new business? Doesn't Microsoft user their monopoly profits as you call them, from both the OS business and the Office doc business, to throw them at the search engine business where they still lose billions of dollars?

Didn't they use those monopoly profits to enter the console market where they had to invest billions of dollars to beat even long time players such as Sony? Is that any more fair than what Google is doing?

What about the mobile market? They're using their monopoly profits to throw billion dollars more at that market, too, in promotions and partnerships with (once) market leaders such as Nokia.

It's Microsoft who are being the pussies. They are the ones trying to use any loophole in the patent system to stop Android from growing any further. Why is Microsoft being such pussies and using the legal system or any means necessary, moral or not, to stop Android, instead of competing in the market like everybody else?

It's Microsoft who are the ones crying Android is stealing their mobile business because they were 2 years late to the game, and now they try to recuperate by exploiting the patent system, instead of catching up with their own technology - you know the stuff that really matters in the end - what you have to show for yourself - not some patents on a paper.