To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
FM is hardly the best person in the world to quote here.
His track record is IMHO pretty abysmal. He is not an Open Source Activist. He seems more like a Shill for the guys from Redmond.
If I were you I'd look at some of the other blogs/news sites for a more balanced opinion of Mr Meuller.
> Just look at how many players are paying royalties on
> many fronts and doing extremely well in their
> business. Why should B&N be any different or exempted
> from the same.
Hehe. It's like saying, look how many are paying royalties to mafia bosses. Why X should be different? Isn't it stupid not to pay to dark empire?
Don't be ridiculous. No one is obligated to pay anything to those robbers. They will try to rob, and are happy when someone gives in. B & N had guts to show them their place.
"Florian Mueller, an intellectual property activist . . ."
Let me fix that for you: Florian Mueller, a likely paid lobbyist for MS . . .
If you look at the things this guy post it appears as he is pushing an agenda for someone.
FROM: http://techrights.org/2010/04/11/florian-mueller-and-erika-mann/
"For those who are not aware, Florian Müller became a lobbyist, but whose lobbyist? More recently he became known for his attempts to derail the Munich migration to GNU/Linux."
My advise don't bother sending anyone his way you will likely get FUD.




Member since:
2007-06-16
For all of you screaming to save Android and B&N, nobody is trying to put them out of business.
I am pasting a comment by blogger Florian Mueller, an intellectual property activist, and he reviews B&N comments, and to me they sound empty and just trying to get a better deal from Microsoft.
Just look at how many players are paying royalties on many fronts and doing extremely well in their business. Why should B&N be any different or exempted from the same.
Read below:
"A substantial part of Barnes & Noble's filing focuses on allegations that Microsoft leverages its patents "to render the Android™ Operating System and other open source operating systems uncompetitive and unpalatable vis-à-vis Microsoft’s own operating systems" (quote from paragraph 43 of the answer to the complaint). Two paragraphs later, Barnes & Noble mentions Microsoft's patent agreement with HTC as an example. However, the HTC example clearly contradicts Barnes & Noble's theory of Android becoming "uncompetitive and unpalatable": earlier this month, HTC's market capitalization surpassed that of Nokia (and previously that of RIM). If a patent license deal with Microsoft rendered Android uncompetitively expensive like Barnes & Noble claims, how come HTC is so very profitable?".
You can read the whole blog here and make up your own mind. But to make up your own mind, some of you are disqualified already (MSFT fans, Android Fans, Apple Fans, Google fans,etc). This is only for the people that are interested in finding the truth in all arguments, not just trying to prove their point! You know who you are!
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/04/barnes-nobles-answer-to-mic...