Microsoft Sues Barnes & Noble Over Android
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.
E-mail Print r 6   · Read More · 60 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/iy2
Thread beginning with comment 467254
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Patent Infringement
by tomcat on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 00:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Patent Infringement"
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

You are not equating the issue of patents vs license agreements, but you are calling people that have no problem with copyright law, but disagree with software patent law, hypocrites.


Because they are hypocrites. You can't believe in using the courts for enforcement of legal rights, on the one hand, but then oppose someone else's use of the same mechanism, unless you're a hypocrite.

Both patent and license issues in this case, and your example, are using the courts to enforce legal rights, but you are refusing to accept that people can agree with copyright law and disagree with patent law.


Whether or not you agree with them is moot. The law is the law.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Patent Infringement
by lemur2 on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 01:13 in reply to "RE[4]: Patent Infringement"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Whether or not you agree with them is moot. The law is the law.


There are also laws against extortion, racketeering, trying to prevent competition (antitrust) and intefering with other people's legal business relations (in this case between Google & Barnes & Noble). Why would you fail to acknowledge those laws?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Patent Infringement
by tomcat on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 03:59 in reply to "RE[5]: Patent Infringement"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

" Whether or not you agree with them is moot. The law is the law.
There are also laws against extortion, racketeering, trying to prevent competition (antitrust) and intefering with other people's legal business relations (in this case between Google & Barnes & Noble). Why would you fail to acknowledge those laws? "

Talk about non-sequitors. I hate to break it to you but trying to equate enforcement of a patent with extortion, racketeering, and other illegal behavior is just completely off the rails.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Read more of this thread... >
RE[5]: Patent Infringement
by molnarcs on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 07:21 in reply to "RE[4]: Patent Infringement"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

Whether or not you agree with them is moot. The law is the law.


Well, there are laws in some parts of the world that virtually enslave women. Actually, the institution of slavery was codified in laws in some points in history (property laws, no less!). So I guess we can just stop protesting or criticizing anything that is ethically abhorrent if there is a law for it somewhere. As you say, THE LAW IS THE LAW!

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[5]: Patent Infringement
by ichi on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 09:17 in reply to "RE[4]: Patent Infringement"
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

You can't believe in using the courts for enforcement of legal rights, on the one hand, but then oppose someone else's use of the same mechanism, unless you're a hypocrite.


So now believing in using the courts to jail a rapist while opposing stoning an adulterer to death is hypocrisy?

Sorry but your argument is BS.

Software patent laws are stupid, and taking advantage of them to squash competition is lame (although not unlawful, mind you, that's something no one has claimed).

Reply Parent Score: 4