Points well taken. By no means am I trying to discredit what Yahoo has been able to accomplish in their long history on the web. Quite contrary, I'm suggesting that if they've been able to out innovate before than can do it once more. Nevertheless, I think by protecting an idea as abstract as a "Personalizable Profile Page" and then lying in wait until someone is on the verge of rendering you irrelevant in your field of play is bad sport. Facebook has been in existence since 2004 and if I remember correctly having a profile page has always been a part of the site as is the case for multiple sites (Monster.com, LinkedIn, MySpace, G+, all have "personalizable" profile pages) why not go after them while they're irrelevant? I just think its poor sportsmanship and largely will not bode well in the court of public opinion as many of Yahoo's consumers are likely also Facebook users.
Why not increase shareholder value through true innovation rather than patent trolling and abuse of a fragile and susceptible patent law system? I think the industry as a whole is better off when firms innovate rather than litigate. Just my 2 cents.
Very good points. I guess I was thinking of interdisciplinary competition in terms of attracting top talent to our sector, not necessarily in direct competition in the marketplace for customers. But you're more than right in that our industry very much empowers other industry sectors which in turn will lead to more internal competition in tech and faster innovation.
So what in your opinion can we do in the here and now to keep our uniqueness intact in the long run?
I'd hate for our industry to begin to be marred by the staleness and greed of the status quo of other industries (i.e. biggest wallet, "royal tech monarchy", et al, win out over best ideas and innovation).