Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Mar 2011 22:52 UTC, submitted by ephracis
Legal Since competing on merit is looked down upon in the computer and software world, companies in this business usually go for the blindfolded chick with the scale and sword. Up until recently, Microsoft didn't go for the whole patent litigation thing, but now that they've tasted some, they want more. They just sued Barnes & Noble, Foxconn, and Inventec for patent infringement because they use Android.
Permalink for comment 467266
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Patent Infringement
by lemur2 on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 01:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Patent Infringement"
Member since:

Yes, you're right. Suing over patent infringement is about quashing competition. But that's the point of patents: the government grants you time-limited monopoly status over a particular idea, and excludes others with the force of the law. That said, just because it's about quashing competition does't mean it's bad. Inventors deserve to be compensated for their inventions. You disagree, obviously, but so what. The law is on my side.

Here is a reasonable summary:

From that opinion: "Hint - "Enable display of a webpage's content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster" is something that anyone with a slow modem and Netscape 2.0 had no choice over - that's how it worked, and predates the patent application date.

The rest of the patents are equally silly. For example, the one about tabs and navigation is anticipated by any web page using frames. Also anticipated by lots of game interfaces.

Prediction: The patents will be show to be invalid, but in the meantime the usual suspects make all sorts of foolish noises."

If the patent claims get thrown out, as there seems at first galnce to be a very good chance, then Microsoft is a sitting duck for tortiuous interference and antitrust counterclaims.

Reply Parent Score: 3