Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Thread beginning with comment 556607
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Here we go again
by bowkota on Mon 25th Mar 2013 22:56 UTC in reply to "Here we go again"
Member since:

Another patent rant from Thom at

Don't go judging on Thomklaw, you'll get voted down.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: Here we go again
by Rehdon on Tue 26th Mar 2013 11:01 in reply to "RE: Here we go again"
Rehdon Member since:

Don't go judging on Thomklaw, you'll get voted down.

The problem is, you're just trolling.

You're trolling because you pretend that all is well and good in patent law land, that poor, innocent Nokia is just asserting rights trampled by big, bad Google. As if it weren't well known by now that patents are indeed more a way of to stifle innovation and attack competitors than a way to protect your own innovation; that this specific behavior has already happened in exactly the same context, as remarked by Thom; and finally that poor, mismanaged Nokia might have other goals in mind, like trying to appear desirable in an acquisition because of their "intellectual property". Note how I left aside any "conspiracy theory".

You're trolling because you pretend not to know that F. Mueller is a well known paid shill, a pawn in a war against Google, and that he's been proven wrong many many times (not really that difficult a task when you side 100% with one of the parties, his anti-Google bias is so clear that I often wonder at the press picking up his statements).

You're trolling because you imply that Groklaw is, viceversa, a pawn in Google's service, while if there's a bias that's towards open standards and open source software; sure some of PJ's conclusions or arguments are not always convincing, but most of her work is based on (crowd-sourced) FACTS, if you have a bone to pick with her start showing where she's wrong with facts, ok?

So if you don't like being voted down, here's a simple solution: stop trolling.


Reply Parent Score: 11

RE[3]: Here we go again
by lucas_maximus on Tue 26th Mar 2013 13:21 in reply to "RE[2]: Here we go again"
lucas_maximus Member since:

Unfortunately Trolling on here also includes having a different opinion.

Reply Parent Score: 1