|
| Authored by: miltonw on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:33 PM EDT |
LOL! That would be a first for FOSS Patents -- being right about any of this
stuff.
Nope, this will not be the historic moment when he is
right.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:34 PM EDT |
No worth the bytes used to write it. People are giving flo too
many hits for ...........[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:40 PM EDT |
I disagree. As has been articulated in previous articles
here, it is up to Microsoft, who is infringing on the
patents, to negotiate a fair and reasonable price. Motorola
gave an offer, which really isn't that high. Microsoft
refused to give a counter offer. Therefore, they are simply
using the technology in the standards patents for free and
they are the ones refusing to negotiate a fair price.
It wasn't until Motorola gave Microsoft an offer and
Microsoft did not suggest a counter offer, but instead ended
the negotiations that Motorola initiated the lawsuit.
My understanding is that FOSS is rather in Microsoft's
pocket, so of course their take is going to be pro-
Microsoft.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:53 PM EDT
- FOSS Patents is right on this case - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 02:56 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:54 PM EDT |
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:00 PM EDT |
honestly, this is a site that is about documenting the truth
and lets the truth speak for itself.
You think posting a FOSSPatents article here is going to be
assumed to be anything other than misleading? We know better.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:13 PM EDT |
These are patents involved in standards. In a fair world you would negotiate
before even selling the product with no threat of injunction. You know whether
you are using the standard or not.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:29 PM EDT |
Unfortunately the base of your argument (or Florian's) is
flawed. The question being litigated here is whether
injunctive relief is ever available for FRAND patents.
Obviously MS in this case, and Apple in other cases want the
answer to be no, because they have refused to negotiate ANY
license with the patent owners. The threat of injunctive
relief is critical, as it is the only tool in the process
capable of making an uncooperative potential licensee actually
come to the table. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:33 PM EDT |
| n/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 06:31 PM EDT |
His client list is down to 2, and he's forced to try and advertise here on
Groklaw.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: hAckz0r on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 06:31 PM EDT |
| The case is called "Microsoft vs Motorola" for a reason. Its Microsoft that
sued, after *they* stopped the negotiations and didn't use the proper 'next
step' in the FRAND process. They just ran home to tell Mommy half truths, and
hoping for a whoopin to happen.
Motorola only used the 'importation
injunction' card AFTER Microsoft made it clear they were not going to even try
to negotiate a deal. The deal was only necessary because Microsoft was being
abusive with patents in the first place. Microsoft is clearly the one who is at
fault with the court case even happening, not Motorola. In this world you can
only reap what you sow, and Microsoft will have the whole World hating them, and
everything about them, before this is all over. Germany is just the start.
---
The Investors IP Law: The future health of a Corporation is
measured as the inverse of the number of IP lawsuits they are currently
litigating. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 06:32 PM EDT |
Judge Robart's jurisdiction ends once one enters Hawaii, Alaska, British
Columbia, Idaho, and Oregon. (To list the states and provinces that border
Washington.)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
