Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 1st Oct 2010 21:08 UTC
Permalink for comment 443531
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 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-02-16
My information about Motorola is that they are a firm supporter of software patents.
If they want other companies to respect their patents, it's only fair if they respect the ones from MS as well.
I've never seen a press release or anything by Motorola that they active fight software patents and that their refusal to license from MS is a political statement against those patents.
If that was the case, I'd fully support Motorola. But as long as I don't have different info about Moto, I merely see this as a dispute between two software patent proponents. Whoever wins doesn't matter because neither company has any plans to do lobby work for abolishing software patents.
If you have different info about Motorola, I'll revoke my comment.
Until then: Within Moto's mindset as software patent supporter, Moto should've been paying MS.