The suit charges that Google and senior executives stole Eli Attia's invention, which is a technology that shortens and makes significantly cheaper the design and construction process, mainly for high-rise and large buildings. Google estimates that the invention has potential revenue of $120 billion annually. — globes.co.il
11 Comments
fuck google, the damn CIA...I have google accounts at a cost - my privacy.
once at a bar in NYC, some Google employee purged a lot of the X agenda to me, I was too drunk to give a shit, then he said "go talk to that girl for me, she needs a guy to hit on her to make her feel good, you'd be doing a good thing."
so I did. her friends were happy that a guy was buying her drinks, and then she asked me 'why are you talking to me?"
I pointed over at the Google douche-bag who quickly put his tail between the legs and took off.
She wasn't happy and I wasn't happy either, I got up to chase the guy down, but her friends said stay. Nothing evolved from that encounter except probably two very disappointed humans (me and her)
Spies are the most pathetic species on this planet. Period!
If Eli Attia has a support fund - I'll donate.
google suck it
Google is no different from Citigroup. The only difference is they divert people from thinking they are a monopoly. Political corruption is the only thing stopping these companies from being sliced up.
If you heard Elizabeth Warren's recent speech (you should) she hits the nail on the head--these companies need to be broken up. Even Apple should be broken up at this point.
Most NYCers run across these types of people--but they are all pretty low on the food chain, but wear the brand names as status signifiers. I had an aquiantence completely disappear after joining a tech co. Guess it's the only perk to working for evil. You can understand how nazism was so popular...it's all the same social dynamics.
wait - google's 2013 annual revenue was... just short of 60B. with everything thrown in.
this thing's going to make 120B/yr in revenue?
um.....
Is Eli Attia the same person as Per Corell...
Here is his patent for this. Once you scroll through several pages of bullshit venn diagrams, you get to the proposal. Which is a database of standardized building modules arranged by geometry. The idea is that there is a system of pre-fab modules which are arranged to build any possible building. Kind of like Lego for adults!
I'm not buying it. Sounds like google didn't either once they studied it, which is why Attia got dumped.
Chris et al: There is no allegation of any spying. Attia and Google had entered into a partnership agreement of some sort to develop this system. At some point Google cancelled the project. Except Attia alleges they simply pushed him out and continued developing the system without him under a subsidiary company.
To me it seems quite possible they really did just give up on his idea - he sounds like a bit of a crackpot inventor. Definitely not a $120 billion concept. Pre-fab highrise construction needs a lot more than a proprietary BIM software to work. Didn't some company in China have the same idea for pre-fab highrise construction last year which never went anywhere?
Another take on this.
Why on earth should Apple be broken up?
LOL at the Per reference midlander! And thank you for that explanation of what's going on here.
Did midlander and Gregory google that? ..............I was addressing the character of someone who likes to collect a lot of information and not make themselves known, who then either entertains themselves or takes advantages of others based on their knowledge, whether Google intentionally spies or not, is irrelevant....see Light persons post.....the douche-bags it attracts says a lot more....and last I checked that Seville Spain thing my j. Mayer looks a lot like 3dh by per correl...but per is crazy, no?
Except Attia alleges they simply pushed him out and continued developing the system without him under a subsidiary company.
Well, did they do that or didn't they? Regardless of whether you think the idea is good (Google thought so, enough to start a secret project based on it with Attia on board), or is worth 120 billion (Autocad grosses 2 million a year, loses money sometimes). The document says that they signed Attia up and developed work with him on board, dropped the project, and then spun off the work in a side company. Whether or not there is a case seems to depend on what the side company is working on, should be pretty clear.
My guess is that he is probably entitled to a portion of the project, and also fine he was pushed out if they were going in a slightly different direction--I thought designers were supposed to be process oriented? Aren't you entitled to something as a designer of the initial project? Doesn't Libeskind get credit for the WTC design, even though it wasn't the final iteration? I find it strange that "architects" are siding with Google over an architect who created the concept and framework for that direction--who the brains at Google thought was good enough to sign an agreement with, stating Attia owned the IP. That seems like at least enough to make a case and probably a large percentage. Google branding/brainwashing must have done its job well to invite the contrarian critique.
^ Lightperson, you've inspired me to do some more research on this. FYI I used Bing, which is not as bad as everyone imagines. Wonder why no one uses it...
So... there isn't enough information to determine whether Google actually is using Attia's ideas, nor whether he deserves any further compensation for that (it isn't clear to me whether he was paid for the time he consulted there). But I did find this quote from Attia which could come straight out of The Fountainhead:
"My goal has always been to provide humanity with the desperately needed, critical, improvement in the way buildings are designed, built, and utilized. A technology that my industry has been relentlessly seeking for over half a century...
"By stealing and bastardizing my technology, Google has deprived humanity of what it urgently needs. And, in the process, has careless and callously wasted three years of my life, drastically inhibiting my ability to pursue it on my own - risking it will be lost forever.
"How dare they?"
So, yeah, I'm criticizing a fellow architect - and suggesting that he has unreasonable expectations as to how others use his ideas. As I see it, he didn't have anything especially valuable to offer, and became obstreperous once he realized he was being marginalized. The issue doesn't seem to be about money so much as about control of an idea. I don't feel that his attitude endears architects to the public or potential collaborators (ie google), nor does it help us move away from the stereotype of being megalomaniacal, controlling and inflexible.
Some references:
Website for Flux, the spin-off which has yet to release any product based on these ideas
Clickbait about this - note that Attia lost a lawsuit against HOK for allegedly copying his design on a hospital.
This topic might be be interesting to discuss with Brian on a future Archinect Sessions episode. Especially - how do patents and copyrights apply to architects' works?
midlander, we will indeed be discussing copyright law vis a vis architecture on an upcoming episode!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.