decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Over wide application of patents | 234 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Over wide application of patents
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 13 2012 @ 11:10 AM EST

Gives a so-called inventor a payoff for something they didn't invent,
whether hardware, software, biologicals, or pharmaceuticals.

The system is supposed to benefit the public. Killing competition only
benefits the gatekeepers.

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple and Microsoft may make up to 600% more from Android than Google in 2013
Authored by: Gringo_ on Tuesday, November 13 2012 @ 11:25 AM EST

PJ asks in her footnote if this does not implicate the (un)fairness of the US patent system. However the better comparison and basis for judging fairness is to compare how much the telecoms and handset manufacturers in the Android alliance make.

Your statement could be read two ways: You could be saying considering the Android OS is free, perhaps patent fees are not unfair, or not remarkably so. You could instead be saying that Android being free may be what's unfair to the competition, not patent fees to Android OEMs.

What ever way you slice it, your response seems to diminish or negate the roll of (un)fairness of the US patent system. I would suggest you completely miss the point. It is widely agreed by anybody but patent lawyers and IP holders that the patent system is broken. Perhaps you weren't around when the dysfunctionality of the patent system was being discussed broadly in articles and publications all over the world, or perhaps you are happy with the patent system.

I happen to be one of those who believe the patent system is dysfunctional, so for me the fact that Android is free irrelevant to the (un)fairness of the US patent system.

Whether Android being free is unfair to the competition is another issue entirely. The competition at any time is free to join the Android alliance or create their own open source OS. I believe the world would be a better place if they did.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple and Microsoft may make up to 600% more from Android than Google in 2013
Authored by: knarf on Tuesday, November 13 2012 @ 11:49 AM EST
APPLE AND MICROSOFT ENTER THE STAGE AFTER THE TRIAL. THEY SPEAK AS ONE WHEN THEY
UTTER THESE WORDS:

"The pound of flesh which I demand of him Is deerely bought, 'tis mine, and
I will haue it."

(CURTAIN)

---
[ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple and Microsoft may make up to 600% more from Android than Google in 2013
Authored by: Gringo_ on Tuesday, November 13 2012 @ 12:03 PM EST

I read that article, and followed links from that to others, and links from the other to yet more etc. This comment is inspired by what I have read, and not a response to the parent comment, which I have just replied to above.

All these articles speculate about the magnitude of a supposed patent tax Android is suffering at the hands of Microsoft and Apple, as if it was fact.

I have commented extensively on this kind of speculation in the past, at a time when M$FT was getting wide press every time they shook down some new Android OEM with their uninspiring patents, combined with their enormous muscle. Each of these articles assumed at that time that the unfortunate victims of Microsoft's extortion were paying any where from 5% to 15% of the price of their devices. However, there was always an NDA (otherwise know as the Omerta) imposed on the victims, so there was never any evidence as to what they were actually paying.

The only "information" available was a rumour started by a Korean analyst that got quoted broadly, then requoted from article to article until it became fact by virtue of the number of times it was quoted (if that is possible!).

I found one final more piece following the chain of links, a press release by Microsoft bragging about the outcome of their attack on HTC...

REDMOND, Wash. — April 27, 2010 — Microsoft Corp. and HTC Corp. have signed a patent agreement that provides broad coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio for HTC’s mobile phones running the Android mobile platform. Under the terms of the agreement, Microsoft will receive royalties from HTC.

The agreement expands HTC’s long-standing business relationship with Microsoft.

Note that there is no figure quoted as to how much HTC will pay, and no indication if it is a two way agreement, where HTC will also receive royalties from Microsoft, or even if there was an agreement HTC will develop Windows phones and royalty payments will be reduced to a token payment.

In the end this is all FUD promoted by Microsoft, both directly and indirectly, to enhance their bargaining position and discourage new players from joining the Android alliance. This whole nasty business is something that needs to be looked into deeply by professional journalists as well as the FTC and the DOJ. It represents misuse of patents and potential antitrust violations.

When Microsoft tried to shake down Barns & Noble, that company fought back. The process revealed the low quality of Microsoft's patents. The B&N counter attack was so unsettling to M$FT that they bought into B&N to settle rather than have all their secrets revealed in open court.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )