Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Jul 2011 14:00 UTC
Microsoft Well, paint me red and call me a girl scout, I totally did not see this one coming at all. This is so utterly surprising it made my brain explode. Hold on to your panties, because this will rock your world. After pressuring several smaller Android vendors into submission (and yes, HTC is still relatively small compared to other players), Microsoft is now moving on to the big one: Redmond is demanding $15 for every Samsung Android device sold. Samsung's choices are simple: pay up, or face another epic lawsuit.
Thread beginning with comment 480054
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Lousewort
Member since:
2006-09-12

I'd love to see a list of what patents Android is infringing on....


Just looking at the link reminded me how idiotic software patents really are:

Patents No. 5,579,517 and 5,758,352, both called “Common name space for long and short filenames”.

Say we have an array of struct{data with file info}; we can maintain two independent indexes, one on filename8-3, and another on filename256, both pointing to the same array address in memory. This implements a common namespace (the array element) for two different filenames. This is the obvious way to implement a dual namespace, and used by programmers for decades. Hardly patentable.

Patent No. 6,621,746 is related to the flash memory management techniques.

Dirty flags? Oh for crying aloud! let's patent that too.

Patent No. 6,826,762, called “Radio interface layer in a cell phone with a set of APIs having a hardware-independent proxy layer and a hardware-specific driver layer”

Ok, this is called an "abstraction layer", in particular, a device abstraction layer. Of course, it's patentable because its for the mobile radio interface. Who really believes that? Since when is an API patentable?

Patent No. 6,909,910 called “Method and system for managing changes to a contact database”

It's really strange, but my old Nokia N95 has a very similar contact management interface. Could that be because it's an _obvious_ way to do it????

Patent no 7,644,376 called “Flexible architecture for notifying applications of state changes”

Ah! a finite state machine driven event interface! Clearly no-one thought of doing this before Microsoft!

Patent No. 5,664,133 called “Context sensitive menu system/menu behavior”

lol! Context sensitive menus were around at least as early as 1990. The Apricot computer (around 1986) had context sensitive menus and quite a nice GUI as I recall.

Patent No. 6,578,054 “Method and system for supporting off-line mode of operation and synchronization using resource state information”

Ever heard of rsync?

Patent No. 6,370,566 called “Generating meeting requests and group scheduling from a mobile device”

...And this is different how, just because it's a mobile computer rather than a desktop one?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

They are dumb!

Reply Parent Score: 2