A U.S. judge has quashed Microsoft's attempts to obtain documents in its antitrust battle against the European Commission, ruling the software giant was trying to undermine European Union law. Elsewhere, Burst.com has filed a countersuit against Apple Computer claiming that the iTunes software, the iPod and the Quicktime streaming software all infringe on patents held by Burst.com, Burst announced Monday.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2006-02-12
Member since:2005-07-07
That Microsoft can't obtain documents from anyone,but AMD can obtain them from Microsoft?
In a word, no.
AMD's case is about a US corporation suing a second US corporation in a US court, and bringing documents from a third US corporation as evidence.
What Microsoft wanted was getting a US court to decide about a case in a foreign court.
Completely diferent cases my friend.
Edited 2006-04-18 21:51
Member since:2006-03-08
"What Microsoft wanted was getting a US court to decide about a case in a foreign court. "
And I'd like to be able to use microsoft products with, let's say a GPL Licence .... ;-)
Funny how microsoft guys have no respect for nothing.
Hopefully, I respect microsoft as much as microsoft respect their competitors...
Member since:
2005-10-19
"The thundering stupidity of Burst.com descends on Apple Computer"
http://www.internet-nexus.com/2006/04/burstcom-files-patent-infring...
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-12
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2006-03-08
Member since:2005-06-29
Tell that one to all the victims of patent abuse. Microsoft uses patents to hold back OSS, Borland has at least one patent that's holding back ReactOS (but this seems like more of a side effect than a goal), and Amazon has used it's one click shopping patent as well as others that it holds against competing online stores. The most dangerous patent holders though, are the ones that wait until you're profitable but still vulnerable and then strike you (for example NTP vs. RIM).
I can't say that I feel sorry for companies who fall victim to their own game of legal lottery, but I can't help feeling that I stand a big risk of comming up with some brilliant idea and then being both robbed of the profits and forced into bankruptcy by some some filthy rich greedy person or entity who'll gain marginally for my suffering.
Patents aren't encouraging innovation, they're making people scared to innovate on the grounds that they'll get sued for infringing on an existing patent. It's impossible to be completely sure your innovations won't fall victim, because patents are worded very broadly and often also cryptically on purpose in the hope that someone will slip up.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Check this out :
http://blogs.siliconvalley.com/gmsv/2006/04/its_antitrust_l.html
Burst is not a so-called "patent troll" -- a company that holds patents but doesn't develop products.
Rather, Burst has a long history of producing and using its patented technology, which strengthens its case.
Edited 2006-04-19 06:34
