Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Nov 2011 16:13 UTC
To anyone who has been reading anything on the web over the past few months, this shouldn't come as a surprise. Barnes & Noble is currently embroiled in a patent lawsuit started by Microsoft, after the bookseller/tablet maker refused to pay protection money to Redmond. Barnes & Noble has now openly said what we already knew, and has filed an official complaint at the US Department of Justice: Microsoft is engaging in anticompetitive practices. Update: Here's the slide deck B&N presented to the DoJ.
Thread beginning with comment 496717
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-17
They request same or more per device than for same license and their own OS combined, so it's worth investigating.
MS is not very careful given that they are proven monopolist abuser. However their stake is very low in the market so it's to early to call it monopolistic.
And anyway their tactic doesn't work for now. Android phones and the iPhone sell better because of the network effect, customer familiarity, apps, and more mature platform. That counts even in the commodity market where this fee is relevant in pricing structure (WP7 is strongly targeting that market). Maybe as Nokia helps them get to more than a few % they will be able to build up a kind of ecosystem that iOS and Android have, but maybe also there's no room for another smartphone OS. Consumers will decide about it.
Member since:2006-01-06
No, that IS an issue. Maybe MS still has a valid case re: some patents - FINE. But if they are trolling for payments (affecting competition) for other stuff that isn´t valid, that is behavior that may very well be sanctionable. Note that other vendors have succombed to these tactics, so it is already affecting the market.
But there's zero evidence that that's occurred. What we do know is that MS has asked Android adopters like B&N to license its patents -- and B&N apparently believes that it isn't obligated to do so. Which is fine. They can take their chances in court. But merely asserting that they don't like patents -- or that patents are anti-competitive -- is a losing argument. That's the nature of patents. They restrict competition by granting the holder a monopoly on the invention. Anybody who wants to use the invention has to license it. That's our system. My bet is that B&N settles this out of court -- or they'll get their asses handed to them.
Member since:2006-01-04
On the other hand, here is some information from an informed source (that stands in stark contrast your ideas.)
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111111121548972
I thought you might like to see the letter [PDF] Barnes and Noble filed with the ITC and the slides [PDF] titled, "Microsoft's Anticompetitive Behavior in the Mobile Operating System Market", that Barnes & Nobles presented to the US Department of Justice's Antitrust Division in July and filed with the ITC as an exhibit, in which it lays out its complaint about Microsoft. It's a compelling read. There are some further exhibits also, including the Barnes & Noble letter to the US DOJ back in April.
In effect, Barnes & Noble says Microsoft is doing what's it's done in the past against Netscape and Java, only now the target is Android and the weapon of choice is patents.
I also thought you'd probably have questions about how there can be an antitrust complaint over patents, since by their very nature patents are a granted monopoly, so I found some resource material for you. For me too, actually, because I was wondering about it myself.
You'll find our old friend SCO Group on page 9 of the slide presentation, by the way, on a list titled "Microsoft Infringement Suits Against Open Source Software", with an annotation: "Microsoft provided financial support to SCO, enabling it to file and litigate several infringement suits targeting open source software." And Barnes and Noble alleges that the Nokia deal included an agreement to pool and then use patents in an aggressive attack against Open Source.
The Barnes & Noble Accusations
The overview, in the slides, of Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior is the following:
Publicly Claiming Control of Android and Other Open Source Operating Systems
Requiring Potential Licensees to Enter into Overly Restrictive Non-Disclosure Agreements
Demanding Royalties Commensurate with Owning the Entire Android Operating Sysem (and Similar to Royalties for a Windows Phone License) Even Though Microsoft Only Owns Trivial Patents
Imposing Licensing Provisions Unrelated to Microsoft's Patents and Designed to Prevent Competitor Innovation
Filing Frivolous Patent Infringement Actions Against Companies That Refuse to Enter Into Anticompetitive Licensing Agreements
Deal with Nokia Includes an Agreement to Engage in a Coordinated Offense Use of Patents Against Open Source Software
Purchasing Patent Portfolios that Threaten Open Source Software
We suspected when it was announced that the deal with Nokia was about patent aggression, and now we see it in black and white. Barnes & Noble lists three deals as anti-competitive, the Nokia deal, the CPTN-Novell patent deal, and the Nortel patent deal. You can see the "trivial patents" Microsoft used in discussions with Barnes & Noble and in its later patent infringement complaint -- not an identical list -- on page 5 of the slides.
Also, the patent infringement case Microsoft filed against Barnes & Noble is ongoing in parallel with the ITC case. Barnes & Noble's answer to the complaint is smoking hot too, and you can read it here. Barnes & Noble says in the answer that "the license fees demanded by Microsoft are higher than what Microsoft charges for a license to its entire operating system designed for mobile devices, Windows Phone 7."
Essentially, they accuse Microsoft of using patents as a weapon to carry out an anti-competitive strategy, a campaign of collecting patents for the specific purpose of attacking Android, "embarking on a campaign of asserting trivial and outmoded patents against manufacturers of Android devices”. We get to look behind the curtain of secrecy now, at last.
In effect, Barnes & Noble says Microsoft is doing what's it's done in the past against Netscape and Java, only now the target is Android and the weapon of choice is patents.
I also thought you'd probably have questions about how there can be an antitrust complaint over patents, since by their very nature patents are a granted monopoly, so I found some resource material for you. For me too, actually, because I was wondering about it myself.
You'll find our old friend SCO Group on page 9 of the slide presentation, by the way, on a list titled "Microsoft Infringement Suits Against Open Source Software", with an annotation: "Microsoft provided financial support to SCO, enabling it to file and litigate several infringement suits targeting open source software." And Barnes and Noble alleges that the Nokia deal included an agreement to pool and then use patents in an aggressive attack against Open Source.
The Barnes & Noble Accusations
The overview, in the slides, of Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior is the following:
Publicly Claiming Control of Android and Other Open Source Operating Systems
Requiring Potential Licensees to Enter into Overly Restrictive Non-Disclosure Agreements
Demanding Royalties Commensurate with Owning the Entire Android Operating Sysem (and Similar to Royalties for a Windows Phone License) Even Though Microsoft Only Owns Trivial Patents
Imposing Licensing Provisions Unrelated to Microsoft's Patents and Designed to Prevent Competitor Innovation
Filing Frivolous Patent Infringement Actions Against Companies That Refuse to Enter Into Anticompetitive Licensing Agreements
Deal with Nokia Includes an Agreement to Engage in a Coordinated Offense Use of Patents Against Open Source Software
Purchasing Patent Portfolios that Threaten Open Source Software
We suspected when it was announced that the deal with Nokia was about patent aggression, and now we see it in black and white. Barnes & Noble lists three deals as anti-competitive, the Nokia deal, the CPTN-Novell patent deal, and the Nortel patent deal. You can see the "trivial patents" Microsoft used in discussions with Barnes & Noble and in its later patent infringement complaint -- not an identical list -- on page 5 of the slides.
Also, the patent infringement case Microsoft filed against Barnes & Noble is ongoing in parallel with the ITC case. Barnes & Noble's answer to the complaint is smoking hot too, and you can read it here. Barnes & Noble says in the answer that "the license fees demanded by Microsoft are higher than what Microsoft charges for a license to its entire operating system designed for mobile devices, Windows Phone 7."
Essentially, they accuse Microsoft of using patents as a weapon to carry out an anti-competitive strategy, a campaign of collecting patents for the specific purpose of attacking Android, "embarking on a campaign of asserting trivial and outmoded patents against manufacturers of Android devices”. We get to look behind the curtain of secrecy now, at last.
There are links to pertinent documents and more information as well.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
"In the first episode of Microsoft's new film series 'On the Whiteboard', Editor Pamela Woon chats with two-time Oscar winner Randy Thom about the (often underestimated) importance of sound in human-technology interactions. Thom, the lead sound designer at Skywalker Ranch who worked on films such as The Incredibles, Castaway and Forrest Gump, says that people rarely consider the significance of those signature sounds that come from their trusty devices, whether it be a cell phone, a computer or a tablet."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
"Microsoft has sensationally abandoned its controversial plans to restrict the sharing of XBox One games, and has also removed daily online authentication requirements for its forthcoming console", reports The Guardian. They had no choice. Still a good move.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
"A snippet of code in the Steam digital distribution platform has revealed that Valve may be planning to let users easily share their games with friends in the future. The Verge has verified the code's authenticity, which was originally spotted by a member of the NeoGAF gaming forum; the code references a 'shared game library' and a notification that would alert a user when their games are currently in use by a borrower." This would change the, uh, game.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Official Apple statement on PRISM and privacy: "Regardless of the circumstances, our Legal team conducts an evaluation of each request and, only if appropriate, we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities. In fact, from time to time when we see inconsistencies or inaccuracies in a request, we will refuse to fulfill it." This is basically Apple re-publishing their earlier statement in a more official manner. You either believe it, or you don't.
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
The open source Contiki operating system and its commercial Thingsquare distribution are making strides towards the connected home. According to a Computerworld article, a new LED light bulb manufacturer is putting small computers into their light bulbs. Each computer runs the Contiki OS, which gives each bulb an IP address and allows them to be controlled with a smartphone application. To connect the bulbs to the application, the bulbs use both Wi-Fi and the much lower power IEEE 802.15.4 mesh technology.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
"Google asked the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Tuesday to ease long-standing gag orders over data requests it makes, arguing that the company has a constitutional right to speak about information it's forced to give the government. The legal filing, which cites the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech, is the latest move by the California-based tech giant to protect its reputation in the aftermath of news reports about sweeping National Security Agency surveillance of Internet traffic." Draining the ditch after the cow has drowned in it.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
"I can't find one person who has been using the Nexus 7 for an extended period of time, and hasn't seen a massive downgrade in performance. Just what kind of downgrade are we talking here? I cannot pick up my Nexus 7 without experiencing problems like a lag of ten seconds, or more, just to rotate the display; touches refusing to acknowledged; stuttering notification panel actions; and unresponsive apps." Fully and utterly agreed. My Nexus 7 was blazing-fast and awesome for a few months, and at some point, it just started sucking. Just like that. I've tried loads of ROMs, and nothing helps.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
A new release of the hobby operating system MenuetOS! The release notes are a bit non-descript, but you'll have to take what you can get: "updates and improvements (picview, httpc, ehci, ...)".
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
"The Internet is one of the most transformative technologies of our lifetimes. But for 2 out of every 3 people on earth, a fast, affordable Internet connection is still out of reach. And this is far from being a solved problem. There are many terrestrial challenges to Internet connectivity - jungles, archipelagos, mountains. There are also major cost challenges. Right now, for example, in most of the countries in the southern hemisphere, the cost of an Internet connection is more than a month's income. Solving these problems isn't simply a question of time: it requires looking at the problem of access from new angles. So today we're unveiling our latest moonshot from Google[x]: balloon-powered Internet access." Insane.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
"MineAssemble is a tiny bootable Minecraft clone written partly in x86 assembly. I made it first and foremost because a university assignment required me to implement a game in assembly for a computer systems course. Because I had never implemented anything more complex than a 'Hello World' bootloader before, I decided I wanted to learn about writing my own kernel code at the same time. Note that the goal of this project was not to write highly efficient hand-optimized assembly code, but rather to have fun and write code that balances readability and speed. This is primarily accomplished by proper commenting and consistent code structuring." Just cool.More News »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2006-08-18
No, that IS an issue. Maybe MS still has a valid case re: some patents - FINE. But if they are trolling for payments (affecting competition) for other stuff that isn´t valid, that is behavior that may very well be sanctionable. Note that other vendors have succombed to these tactics, so it is already affecting the market.
If they are charging a radically higher fee for patents vs. what they charge for WP7 which includes those and much more, there is a case for non-competitive practices because that is obviously not a level playing field, but one where they are leveraging their advantage in one ´market´ (patents) to advantage themselves in another market (OS´s). It doesn´t matter if the component actions might otherwise be legal, doing that is illegal... ESPECIALLY in the EU, even if they are using US patent law that can and obviously does affect competition within the EU.
It will be very interesting if this case goes forward, to see if the court subpoenas MS / other vendors to see what is the actual substance of what is being discussed behind NDA secrecy...
Edited 2011-11-09 19:01 UTC