• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

MS vs. Google: What patents are they claiming, exactly?

C

cheesehead

Lifer
MS has been demanding fees from some cell phone vendors, presumably in an attempt to build the legal groundwork required for claiming patent infringement by Google. What, exactly, has Google done to violate their patents? AFAIK, the user interface dates back to the days of the Newton while the OS is good old-fashioned Unix-style ancientness.
 
The dirty little secret in the tech world is that companies knowingly violate each others patents. There is a business decision made that weighs the value of expected revenue against the possible exposure to a lawsuit if a patent claim actually takes place. If the exposure is too great, sometimes efforts are made to acquire the technology through licensing, joint-venture, merging/purchasing the patent holder, etc... also the decision might be made to spin-off the product to a subsidiary, or not develop the product at all. Most of the very public patent disputes are issues that have been in contention for years, and the headline step of filing a lawsuit is simply one company trying to force the other party back to the negotiating table where they can both agree on a price to share or transfer the patent. When the companies settle on terms (sometimes financial, sometimes not), all of a sudden the patents are no longer an issue... case in point:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/apr10/04-27mshtcpr.mspx
 
Last edited:
gsaldivar said:
The dirty little secret in the tech world is that companies knowingly violate each others patents. There is a business decision made that weighs the value of expected revenue against the possible exposure to a lawsuit if a patent claim actually takes place. If the exposure is too great, sometimes efforts are made to acquire the technology through licensing, joint-venture, merging/purchasing the patent holder, etc... also the decision might be made to spin-off the product to a subsidiary, or not develop the product at all. Most of the very public patent disputes are issues that have been in contention for years, and the headline step of filing a lawsuit is simply one company trying to force the other party back to the negotiating table where they can both agree on a price to share or transfer the patent. When the companies settle on terms (sometimes financial, sometimes not), all of a sudden the patents are no longer an issue... case in point:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/apr10/04-27mshtcpr.mspx
Click to expand...

But none of that says which patents MS alleges were infringed upon...
 
I really hate MS. They pull this shit all the time, claiming people infringe on their patents but then won't tell anyone which patents they are infringing on. Of course people settle because who wants to get into a legal battle with MS?
 
JD50 said:
I really hate MS. They pull this shit all the time, claiming people infringe on their patents but then won't tell anyone which patents they are infringing on. Of course people settle because who wants to get into a legal battle with MS?
Click to expand...
Now really, how could anyone claim to another of this infringement and not tell them what the nature of it is? Just because you do not know (ignorant as I am, here), doesn't mean Google hasn't been informed, or will be one a patent infringement case is issued.

So, go on hating M$ and not the infringing party that failed to a) do a patent search to keep them safe, or b) failed to hide it from the patent holder.
 
all the open source stuff (linux, ogg, openoffice...) is vulnerable. it could all be shut down tommorow if the big companies wanted it to be, and everyone knows it which is why companies like asus, htc, xandros, canonical etc... are starting to pay up
 
Last edited:
OBLAMA2009 said:
all the open source stuff (linux, ogg, openoffice...) is vulnerable. it could all be shut down tommorow if the big companies wanted it to be, and everyone knows it which is why companies like asus, htc, canonical etc... are starting to pay up
Click to expand...

Saying "all the open source stuff" is deceptive at best and a blatant lie at worst. Unless you've got magical list of patents that every OSS project in existence infringes upon. Do you have any proof of Canonical paying fees to license a patent? I don't remember hearing about something like that and Google didn't come up with anything either.
 
OBLAMA2009 said:
all the open source stuff (linux, ogg, openoffice...) is vulnerable. it could all be shut down tommorow if the big companies wanted it to be, and everyone knows it which is why companies like asus, htc, canonical etc... are starting to pay up
Click to expand...

If any of the big companies were as confident as you about that, it would have been done a long, long time ago.

Besides, that sort of suit might be just what would trigger a massive patent war.

As for those companies "paying up", I don't see it. So far, HTC is in litigation, and Canonical is paying for some codec licensing.

It's not nearly as cut-and-dry as you think it is.
 
Last edited:
Here is a good perspective piece on this subject:

http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/what-the-mobile-patent-fight-all-about-117

"Although Apple has numerous multitouch patents, several competitors are willing to deploy multitouch capabilities even at risk of a lawsuit..."

"Without multitouch capability in their devices, mobile vendors "won't be competitive against iPhone ... One reason they're willing to risk possible suits from Apple is a belief they likely have mobile patents that Apple or others may be infringing. For example, HTC ended up licensing some mobile software stack with the knowledge that they have patents in other areas Apple may be infringing on..."

"Cross-licensing is a common technique to settling such disputes; for example, Apple and Microsoft settled their user interface dispute this way a decade ago..."

"Microsoft, meanwhile, has licensed some of its patents to HTC for use on Android smartphones. HTC will pay royalties to Microsoft, which had declined to say what technologies were covered by the patents, though news reports indicate they concern the mobile operating system's software stack..."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top