Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Feb 2012 23:40 UTC
Legal "We learned on January 31 that Barnes & Noble had suffered a major setback in a patent-infringement lawsuit filed against the company by Microsoft. That day, an administrative law judge at the International Trade Commission had tossed out the company's key defense, that Microsoft was engaging in 'patent misuse' as part of a larger scheme to 'kill Android'. Today the full opinion has been made public." Microsoft's protection racket might be legal, but that doesn't make it moral. It's based on software patents, and is thus, by definition, morally reprehensible and sleazy.
Thread beginning with comment 507331
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by stabbyjones on Thu 16th Feb 2012 00:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
stabbyjones
Member since:
2008-04-15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNj1dXi-z0M

One thing i never thought of, are these agreements related only to the US?

So let's say I buy a new Galaxy Nexus in Australia does Samsung still have to pay MS?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by jabbotts on Thu 16th Feb 2012 14:58 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

probably.. the agreements tend to be "per unit sold" not "per unit sold in xyz". I'd like to think it was only units sold in the US but I'm pretty sure part of my non-US purchase will be funnelled back into the MS legal team budget. Friggin parasite that MS is.

Nexus is a very nice phone; my only complaint so far is the lack of a removable SD slot.. boo google/samsung.. why you know give me removable SD slot on a device meant to have high flash read/write traffic! (Sadly, Android is currently the most flexible OS replacement for my beloved N900/Maemo.)

Reply Parent Score: 2