Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th Jul 2011 22:12 UTC
Microsoft "One of Microsoft's hottest new profit centers is a smartphone platform you've definitely heard of: Android. Google's Linux-based mobile operating system is a favorite target for Microsoft's patent attorneys, who are suing numerous Android vendors and just today announced that another manufacturer has agreed to write checks to Microsoft every time it ships an Android device. Microsoft's latest target is Wistron Corp., which has signed a patent agreement 'that provides broad coverage under Microsoft's patent portfolio for Wistron's tablets, mobile phones, e-readers and other consumer devices running the Android or Chrome platform', Microsoft announced." That's the reality we live in, folks. This is at least as criminal - if not more so - than Microsoft's monopoly abuse late last century. After the Nortel crap, it's completely left the black helicopter camp for me: Microsoft, Apple, and several others are working together to fight Android the only way they know how: with underhand mafia tactics. Absolutely sickening. Hey Anonymous, are you listening? YES I WENT THERE.
Thread beginning with comment 479732
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Patents are patents
by Not2Sure on Wed 6th Jul 2011 07:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Patents are patents"
Not2Sure
Member since:
2009-12-07

The second objection is more simple ... software patents are not being used in the manner you describe. Microsoft did not invent Android, nor did they write any of the code. There is a vast quantity of prior art in mobile phones, smartphones and Java language subsets on mobile phones via which to implement "apps". Where do Microsoft get off claiming that they "invented" any part of Android?


Do you have some knowledge the rest of us do not of what it is Microsft is claiming or are you just pulling a Holwerda and alleging some bullshit in order to justify your commentary? Do you have copies of demand letters made by Microsoft on Wistron Corp? Can you give us a link so we can read them and decide for ourselves?

Because as far as I can tell, a manufacturer looking at putting a product using software components it did not create into the marketplace using Android saw some legal risk and sought indemnification. NEWSFLASH: Google offers, none, zero, nada, and that should tell you exactly how much Google legal really believes Android is unencumbered.

What a company's evangelists and PR hacks say is alot different than the actions taken by that corporation as a legal entity. If Google really believed as you do that Android sprang from the wells of creativity untapped and unencumbered by any legal entanglement then it would offer indemnification to the manufacturers. The don't and they most likely never will.

Microsoft/Wistron have formed a business arrangement. It is neither extortion nor criminal no matter what kind FUD bullshit the author of thread would like to color it with (his personal adolescent view of US law and the world notwithstanding). It's the same calculus that HTC used and boy, that sure has really screwd up their Android product lines hasn't it? It's really hard to believe how they even sell a single device given that consumers everywhere must cringe knowing they are paying extortion money isn't it?

Whatever.

Is it just me or is OSNews quickly sliding into the toilet bowl of tech erudition that is /.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[5]: Patents are patents
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 6th Jul 2011 08:15 in reply to "RE[4]: Patents are patents"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Do you have some knowledge the rest of us do not of what it is Microsft is claiming or are you just pulling a Holwerda and alleging some bullshit in order to justify your commentary? Do you have copies of demand letters made by Microsoft on Wistron Corp? Can you give us a link so we can read them and decide for ourselves?


And that's the problem, isn't it? Microsoft is unwilling to divulge which patents Linux is supposedly infringing, or which patents these Android vendors are infringing. This means that nobody can start developing workarounds - which, of course, is exactly what Microsoft wants. The secrecy ensures nobody knows how to avoid these patents, and it means the public at large can't try and help in invalidating these patents.

So, we'd love to have this knowledge you speak of... But Microsoft is too afraid to let the world know which patents it is using in its extortion campaign. If their patent claims really were as strong as some here say they are... Why is Microsoft being so secretive? I mean, they shouldn't have to be afraid of scrutiny, right?

Is it just me or is OSNews quickly sliding into the toilet bowl of tech erudition that is /.


Ah yes, the universal 'zOMG a viewpoint differs from mine site Xyz is going down the drain!1!!".

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Patents are patents
by Not2Sure on Wed 6th Jul 2011 09:02 in reply to "RE[5]: Patents are patents"
Not2Sure Member since:
2009-12-07

Again, more smoke and mirrors conspiracy being used to justify what is basically FUD. If it was as clear as you want to pretend it is in your world, then no corporate entity with proper legal advice would be doing business with / seeking indemnfication from Microsoft in this respect because they in turn would be guilty of stealing from shareholders.

So, this is the actual reality we live in. If Microsoft in this day and age were extorting cash payments from small companies, documents would have already leaked demonstrating that fact, no?

And let's check out your viewpoint and the language you chose to utilize to describe this news:

Extortion, target, crap, criminal, underhand(sic)ed mafia tactics, sickening. Oh and a reference to an internet bully as if bullying online is somehow acceptable.

It's adolescent, fanboi language. You can't justify a single thing you wrote. And my criticism absolutely has nothing to do with your "viewpoint" differing from mine because in all honesty you have nothing that anyone would recognize as a rational viewpoint in this matter with which I would care to discuss. It's just gruber-esque drivel.

Everyone in the smartphone industry is suing everyone else because there has been no real innovations in years and there are billions to fight over. Attempting to cast it in terms of heroes and villians is pandering.

Edited 2011-07-06 09:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Patents are patents
by pantheraleo on Wed 6th Jul 2011 13:37 in reply to "RE[5]: Patents are patents"
pantheraleo Member since:
2007-03-07

And that's the problem, isn't it? Microsoft is unwilling to divulge which patents Linux is supposedly infringing, or which patents these Android vendors are infringing.


It also means that Microsoft can't sue. If they want to sue for patent infringement, obviously they will have to divulge which patents they think are being infringed.

This means that nobody can start developing workarounds - which, of course, is exactly what Microsoft wants.


Well again, if Microsoft refuses to divulge which patents it thinks are being violated, it means they can't take legal action.

The secrecy ensures nobody knows how to avoid these patents, and it means the public at large can't try and help in invalidating these patents.


Does it matter? Again, if Microsoft wants to maintain the secrecy, they can't take legal action. Doing so would require divulging which patents it thinks are being infringed. So as long as Microsoft wants to play the game this way, no action needs to be taken for either avoiding the patents, or trying to invalidate them.

Ah yes, the universal 'zOMG a viewpoint differs from mine site Xyz is going down the drain!1!!".


I think it's more your utterly black and white view on issues Thom. And the fact that you write like a reporter from Fox news. Your articles are heavily biased towards one side. And when someone (like me) submits an article with an alternative view point, you quash it and don't publish it because it doesn't agree with your views.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Patents are patents
by lemur2 on Wed 6th Jul 2011 09:53 in reply to "RE[4]: Patents are patents"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"The second objection is more simple ... software patents are not being used in the manner you describe. Microsoft did not invent Android, nor did they write any of the code. There is a vast quantity of prior art in mobile phones, smartphones and Java language subsets on mobile phones via which to implement "apps". Where do Microsoft get off claiming that they "invented" any part of Android?


Do you have some knowledge the rest of us do not of what it is Microsft is claiming or are you just pulling a Holwerda and alleging some bullshit in order to justify your commentary? Do you have copies of demand letters made by Microsoft on Wistron Corp? Can you give us a link so we can read them and decide for ourselves?

Because as far as I can tell, a manufacturer looking at putting a product using software components it did not create into the marketplace using Android saw some legal risk and sought indemnification. NEWSFLASH: Google offers, none, zero, nada, and that should tell you exactly how much Google legal really believes Android is unencumbered.

What a company's evangelists and PR hacks say is alot different than the actions taken by that corporation as a legal entity. If Google really believed as you do that Android sprang from the wells of creativity untapped and unencumbered by any legal entanglement then it would offer indemnification to the manufacturers. The don't and they most likely never will.

Microsoft/Wistron have formed a business arrangement. It is neither extortion nor criminal no matter what kind FUD bullshit the author of thread would like to color it with (his personal adolescent view of US law and the world notwithstanding). It's the same calculus that HTC used and boy, that sure has really screwd up their Android product lines hasn't it? It's really hard to believe how they even sell a single device given that consumers everywhere must cringe knowing they are paying extortion money isn't it?
"

How hard is it to understand that Microsoft did not write even one line of Android software?

There is no Microsoft effort that has gone into the making of Android. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Zip. Diddly squat.

No programming effort that Microsoft has paid for has been "stolen" by Android.

Microsoft are claiming, without any proof, ownership rights over some of the mathematics concepts that Android uses. Microsoft is reportedly charging more for this tenuous claim of ownership than the entire cost of WP7 to OEMs. Most jurisdictions of the world (which is the marketplace for Android) hold that mathematical ideas cannot be owned in this way.

Why should companies using Android have to pay Microsoft anything, just because it is too expensive to argue the point in court? It makes no sense economically, and it clearly isn't right.

IMO it is extortion, pure and simple.

Edited 2011-07-06 10:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Patents are patents
by Not2Sure on Wed 6th Jul 2011 10:31 in reply to "RE[5]: Patents are patents"
Not2Sure Member since:
2009-12-07



Microsoft are claiming, without any proof, ownership rights over some of the mathematics concepts that Android uses. Microsoft is reportedly charging more for this tenuous claim of ownership than the entire cost of WP7 to OEMs. Most jurisdictions of the world (which is the marketplace for Android) hold that mathematical ideas cannot be owned in this way.

IMO it is extortion, pure and simple.


Ok and the the documents where Microsoft make this claim without proof is? Oh, I see it's only in your head so you can't provide a link. Maybe you should patent it.

Also, you cannot patent mathematics in the US either. Pure algorithms are not patentable in the US where the machine-or-transformation test is still the rule.

Finally the cost of wp7 licenses to OEMs far exceeds the indemnification contracts that are rumored to have seen the light of day. Again, I'm sure you're commenting about something you read from someone who knew who someone who heard that....

Some pundits argue that the total revenue to MS from indemnifcation grants to Android manufacturers combined exceeds total revenue from WP7 licensees but that is directly related to the number of units involved. It's usually done so in a smear campaign to paint Microsoft as more interested in litigation than software development for WP7.

IMO is right. Your opinion. And I'm glad it's worth about exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

Please let me know when one of these threats from Microsoft (which is a fundamental element in any prosecution of extortion in most US states "pure and simple") ever materializes.

Reply Parent Score: 1