Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 29th Jul 2012 10:48 UTC
Legal Groklaw nails it: "In other words, [Apple and Microsoft] want to disarm the companies that got there first, built the standards, and created the field, while the come-later types clean up on patents on things like slide to unlock or a tablet shape with rounded corners. Then the money flows to Apple and Microsoft, and away from Android - and isn't that really the point of all this, to destroy Android by hook or by crook? The parties who were in the mobile phone business years before Apple or Microsoft even thought about doing it thus get nothing much for their earlier issued patents that have become standards. Apple and Microsoft can't compete on an even field, because the patent system rewards the first to invent (or now, after the recent patent reform, the first to file). Neither Apple nor Microsoft got there first. Samsung was there, since the '90s." To illustrate: Apple is demanding $24 (!) per Samsung device for design patents, while at the same time, Apple also demands that Samsung does not charge more than $0.0049 per standards essential patent per device. This is absolutely, utterly, and entirely indefensible. And then Apple and its supporters have the nerve to claim Samsung is ripping them off. Yes, this pisses me off, and no, that's not because it's Apple doing it (Microsoft is just as guilty). It's because this is plainly, utterly, clearly, and intrinsically unfair.
Permalink for comment 529002
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Mobile business?
by cdude on Tue 31st Jul 2012 06:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Mobile business?"
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

Actually they have not. Here in germany there was even a court-decision that Microsoft is not allowed to say Linux, Android, whatever does violate or use there technologies. They need to prov what they never did. Its all marketing-bs to make ppl believe they have a point and that its dangerous to use Linux cause of IP owned by them and used in Linux.

Why do you believe Microsoft goes to the end users and reaches secret agreements rather then going direct to the source and brings there patents to court? Maybe because they would lose (read up on prior art for example on the FAT issue where Torvals himself came up with that long before Microsoft - its all documented and proven)? Maybe cause it would take exactly 5 minutes to work around whatever patents ONCE you know what that patents are?

As long as Microsoft does not go to the project itself but makes secret argreements and as long as Apple fights with design-patents its clear that they have nothing real in there hands.

Edited 2012-07-31 06:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2