Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th May 2010 14:55 UTC
Permalink for comment 423665
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-02-16
That has nothing to do with the concrete licensing deal that was signed with HTC.
HTC and MS signed a deal about Andoid patents which confirms that Android uses techniques that are patented by MS or HTC wouldn't have signed it. MS would've not taken such steps that annoy its biggest licensee of Windows Mobile -- Motorola would be a good target for a PR stunt. Motorola only sells Android phones and is way to poor for a long-running lawsuit.
But that actually not the point. The point is that Android is defended by you guys (as you just proved). You just stick you head in the sand and pretend no patent is valid.
OTOH you guys have no problem bashing AVC based on misinformation. The AVC licensing terms on the MPEG-LA website are very clear that no "little guys" are even required to pay fees as aren't low volume businesses with less than 100,000 paying customers per year.
As a side, note unlike Android, MeeGo is actually safe from patent threats. Intel and Nokia both guaranty that they will defend any MeeGo adopter who is being threatened. See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/04/meego_linux_mobile_android_...