|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 13 2012 @ 02:06 PM EST |
>On the question of Android being "free", there are two Androids,
the free one where a device maker takes the OS and does what he likes with it,
BSD-like, but cannot use the Android trademark; and there's the
"non-"free Android where the device maker uses the trademark, and
joins the Google family using marketplace, maps, etc, and has terms and
conditions imposed. This second group are the targets in the present war,
profiting without investment, sharing code without IP rents, and Google is
inciting them to do so.
A nice picture. Unfortunately, little things like "facts" get in the
way. Remember the Barnes and Noble Android bookreader? Which was sued by
Microsoft in what the victim alleged was conspiracy to abuse patents?
You probably don't. Because it wasn't called Android, and didn't use the Google
maps or marketplace. It's called "Nook".
Amazon knuckled under a similar extortion demand. Their Kindle device isn't
called "Android", doesn't use Google marketplace or maps ... and was
also sued.
Microsoft, Apple, and Oracle aren't distinguishing between "good" and
"bad" Androids.
And we in the real technology industry aren't distinguishing between
"good" and "bad" mathematics patents. (Hint: saying "on
a computer" can't make a bad mathematics patent good. Like Abe Lincoln
famously asked, "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog
have?" The answer is "Four. Because calling a tail a leg doesn't make
it one.")
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
