tebee
Veteran Member
Posts: 12
|
Authored by tebee on Sept 5, 2013 14:35:56 GMT
|
|
|
Authored by webster on Sept 5, 2013 15:35:11 GMT
.
It may be a Pyrrhic victory. The judge has been a pure homer in rendering innovative decisions to favor the Monopoly. Unless the Monopoly can collect attorneys' fees, they have already spent far more than $14.5 on their own attorneys. They will spend far more to sustain this victory on appeal. It shows they are willing to spend any amount to smear Google.
They better watch out. Google could offer a free Android for a Nokia trade-in. Since the only reason people buy the Nokias is price, this would stop the surge of the Monopoly smartphone surge to 2%.
~webster~
.
|
|
|
Authored by eamacnaghten on Sept 5, 2013 16:23:12 GMT
We all here read Groklaw and aware of the issues. If Motorola/Google lose on appeal it will almost guarantee that companies will not contribute any of there patented technology to any standards. The effect of this I do not know (I, like most, am no fan of SW patents) but it will be game changing.
What is ridiculous is that MS and Apple is asking to pay loads-a-money for design patents (rounded rectangles, rubber band scrolling, etc), whereas Motorola is being told it can only charge peanuts for technology based patents. This, to a foreigner (of the US) is looking like more and more like protectionism rather than IP related. Not good at all.
|
|
Anonymous Coward
Guest
|
Authored by Anonymous Coward on Sept 5, 2013 20:21:38 GMT
The only standards MS is interested in is ones it creates, gets accepted as de facto standards AND, MOST importantly, they control - when then makes any patents for that standard essential and ought to be classified as FRAND (but they won't be).
The only reason MS went running like a cry baby bully to teacher was because someone else had come up with a standard which they had no control over and for which they had get a licence.
US justice stinks - there is no justice, only favours for election fund contributors: this is clear evidence!
|
|
crizh
Veteran Member
Posts: 3
|
Authored by crizh on Sept 5, 2013 20:59:17 GMT
Blaargh!!
I've been moderating the discussion of this on Slashdot and I'm beginning to wonder why I waste my time.
Dozens and dozens of idiots who clearly understand the issues but can't see the wood for the trees.
Non Discriminatory!!!
Motorola were required to license their H.264 patents in a Non Discriminatory fashion. They have to treat each potential licensee the same way. They made the same opening offer they made to everybody.
All these idiots are acting like that opening offer was an extortionate demand. Well it was neither extortionate nor a demand. It was an opening offer, the same opening offer they routinely made for those patents because they are required to treat each license 'applicant' the same way.
To accept Microsoft's demands would have been a breach of Motorola's duty under the SEP agreement. They cannot give Microsoft a better deal than everybody else because that would be Discriminatory to their other licensees.
Google ought to consider having their other licensees get together to file an amicus brief for the appeal pointing out that Microsoft's sweetheart deal discriminates against all those that negotiated in good faith with Motorola for these patents and thus breaches the terms of the SEP agreement.
[/rant]
|
|
nsomos
Veteran Member
Posts: 140
|
Authored by nsomos on Sept 6, 2013 1:37:00 GMT
What little faith I have in the US 'Justice' system will be gone if somehow Motorola/Google does not eventually win what they should clearly win.
|
|
celtichackr
Veteran Member
Hacker, geek, all around technoaddict. Amateur Scientist (well except for those pesky degrees).
Posts: 51
|
Authored by celtichackr on Sept 6, 2013 3:29:22 GMT
Now come the days when we shall all miss the open and even handed truth dispensed by PJ. The /. reporting on this is so badly slanted it make me want to scream. I wonder how much the fine would have been had Goggle gone for the Bench trial. Still it was a forgone conclusion for any Groklawite. Motorola, not Google, since Google was not a party to this lawsuit, was facing an uphill battle in enemy territory. The ruling by this judge will clearly not stand on appeal, and if they do, you'll see every tech coming pull their patents out of these pools at the earliest opportunity.
Cry Havoc, and let loose the Dogs of War!
These Fools know not what peril they are inviting.
It will be a patent Bloodbath.
Which might wind up bringing an end to Software Patents. If so good riddance, but MS and Apple will still be the losers no matter the outcome.
|
|
stegu
Veteran Member
Posts: 15
|
Authored by stegu on Sept 6, 2013 9:10:40 GMT
If Microsoft and Apple, and Motorola, and even Google, end up losing loads of money over this, no matter. The important overall goal should be to bring an end to software patents. They are a drag on innovation, a deterrent to new market actors, and a general intellectual embarrassment to the entire world. If software developers and engineers, the actual innovators, surrender this issue to the patent offices, patent attorneys, patent hoarders and patent trolls, we will end up in a situation where progress is impossible. Some companies and entities like MS and MPAA/RIAA tend to take a short-sighted view on this. They seem to want to freeze our society in status quo and never have to adapt or learn anything new ever again, but that would be disastrous to what I consider to be a large part of what defines humanity: both as individuals and as a species, we strive to get better at things. In the long run and in the big picture, change is always good.
|
|
GLaw
Guest
|
Authored by GLaw on Sept 6, 2013 11:18:59 GMT
Blaargh!! I've been moderating the discussion of this on Slashdot and I'm beginning to wonder why I waste my time. Dozens and dozens of idiots who clearly understand the issues but can't see the wood for the trees. Non Discriminatory!!!
Motorola were required to license their H.264 patents in a Non Discriminatory fashion. They have to treat each potential licensee the same way. They made the same opening offer they made to everybody. All these idiots are acting like that opening offer was an extortionate demand. Well it was neither extortionate nor a demand. It was an opening offer, the same opening offer they routinely made for those patents because they are required to treat each license 'applicant' the same way. To accept Microsoft's demands would have been a breach of Motorola's duty under the SEP agreement. They cannot give Microsoft a better deal than everybody else because that would be Discriminatory to their other licensees. Google ought to consider having their other licensees get together to file an amicus brief for the appeal pointing out that Microsoft's sweetheart deal discriminates against all those that negotiated in good faith with Motorola for these patents and thus breaches the terms of the SEP agreement. [/rant] You should put this post at this TechDirt thread. Groklaw is even mentioned in the comments section and the author writes :
|
|