Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 09:37 UTC
Legal So let me get this straight. Nokia claims that the Nexus 7 infringes upon standard essential wifi patents, and that Asus does not have a license. How in the name of hell is it possible that Asus has been shipping a gazillion wifi-enabled products every year for god knows how long now, and only now does Nokia notice? Wait - of course. Silly me. If you can't compete, litigate. D'oh.
Thread beginning with comment 524960
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: So?
by Nelson on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE: So?"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29


So, why not come to Asus in the past decade or so Asus has been shipping wifi products? Why now? And with an Android product specifically? After a Microsoft man takes over Nokia? I'm sure it's all coincidence!


Two things. First, they've made no indication they're actually going to sue. This is in response to questioning. They simply confirmed ASUS and Google are not licensees.

Second, Nokia has discretion to assert its patents whenever it feels like it. Why is Motorola waiting until now to sue over FRAND? Because it feels like it.



If you're defending yourself from patent trolls like Apple and patent mafia like Microsoft... It sucks they're using FRAND-stuff, but considering it's a defensive move, it's understandable.


Unbelievable that you can defend such an egregious abuse of software patents. You talk about the evils of software patents, well this is arguably the most nefarious.


Let's see.

1) Nokia can't compete. The company is in a massive downwards spiral.
2) They are litigating.

So yes.


They are not litigating. Motorola is. Your statement, and this article is inaccurate. Of course, I don't expect you to admit you're wrong. You never do.

Edited 2012-07-03 10:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: So?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 10:39 in reply to "RE[2]: So?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Two things. First, they've made no indication they're actually going to sue. This is in response to questioning. They simply confirmed ASUS and Google are not licensees.


They're not litigating, you're right. This is the first step though, as history has taught us. Pattern recognition: when a technology company is in a downward spiral, they start to sue. It's inevitable like the tides rolling in.

Why is Motorola waiting until now to sue over FRAND? Because it feels like it.


Because they have to deal with aggressive patent lawsuits and extortion by people who can't compete on merit. Motorola sued defensively, not offensively.

Unbelievable that you can defend such an egregious abuse of software patents. You talk about the evils of software patents, well this is arguably the most nefarious.


Right, a defensive lawsuit is more nefarious than Microsoft's long-filename bullshit or Apple slide-to-unlock nonsense.

Right. If somebody starts punching me in the face and I happen to have a bat in my hands, sure as hell I'm going to use it to defend myself.

Edited 2012-07-03 10:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: So?
by Nelson on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 10:49 in reply to "RE[3]: So?"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Its amusing to watch you defend something you can't stand because you refuse to admit youre wrong. It really is.

You were against software patents before you were for them. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: So?
by allanregistos on Wed 4th Jul 2012 04:40 in reply to "RE[3]: So?"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

Like this one:
http://www.crunchdot.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/610a1ff994locke...

Apple innovates, yes, the picture shows that it's heavy and difficult to unlock that particular door, while Apple's design is very beautiful and easy to use, you only need to slide your finger, and lo and behold, you can use your cellphone.

Apple's argument must be:
Cellphone != House. Therefore arguing against them about "slide to unlock" prior art is nonsense.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: So?
by lucas_maximus on Wed 4th Jul 2012 09:37 in reply to "RE[3]: So?"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

They're not litigating, you're right. This is the first step though, as history has taught us. Pattern recognition: when a technology company is in a downward spiral, they start to sue. It's inevitable like the tides rolling in.


From the article.

However, unlike Apple, it's doubtful that Nokia will seek injunctions against the Google Nexus 7. Instead, Nokia is more likely to request that Google or Asus obtain the proper licenses.


Lets see what happens.

I personally think the title is alarmist.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: So?
by Fergy on Thu 5th Jul 2012 14:18 in reply to "RE[3]: So?"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

It's inevitable like the tides rolling in.

tide goes in tide goes out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BCipg71LbI&feature=player_detailpag...

Edited 2012-07-05 14:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: So?
by JAlexoid on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 12:50 in reply to "RE[2]: So?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Unbelievable that you can defend such an egregious abuse of software patents. You talk about the evils of software patents, well this is arguably the most nefarious.

Just a note: Moto's patents don't look like they are all software patents(even H264 can be interpreted both ways). Nokia's WiFi patents don't look like software patents as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3