|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, September 17 2012 @ 11:59 AM EDT |
Then, let's see what their attitude is to patent renewals.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Monday, September 17 2012 @ 12:35 PM EDT |
They claim they are ready and willing, just as
soon as the court sets the (low) price they
are angling for.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: symbolset on Tuesday, September 18 2012 @ 12:02 AM EDT |
Microsoft didn't _quite_ "refuse" to license the patents. They went to court to
protest that the offered terms were unfair without offering a counter. They
have only "neglected" to license the patents, and only insomuch as the patents
are valid and applicable to their use (both points as yet unproven in court).
Microsoft's lawyers are playing a dangerous game, trying to thread a course
through a minefield in the Northwest passage. For now though, it's working. I
guess that's why they get the big bucks.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 18 2012 @ 09:49 AM EDT |
1) Apple isn't involved in this case.
2) There's *ample* (undisputed) evidence, in the corresponding case in which
Apple *is* involved, that there was a lot of negotiating before that case was
filed.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 18 2012 @ 03:57 PM EDT |
Even better. Make them forefit a patent they've won a lawsuit
against Android on. Thinking the rubber-band patent for
starters[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
