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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
Corporate greed = competition destruction. | 297 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corporate greed = competition destruction.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 08:05 AM EST
Anything which dilutes the profit stream is harmful to some mindsets. Therefore,
to them, all competition must be prevented or destroyed.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

That is why international standards bodies insist on FRAND
Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, January 22 2013 @ 04:46 AM EST
The patented inventions are selected by the technology experts of the world,
working in international standards bodies, as the best way of getting a field of
technology to work. FRAND is a reasonable way of making sure new entrants to the
field can be commercially successful.

Trolls cannot get a look in to world technology standards. Trolls can only abuse
patents to kill world standards in the country within which they operate.

FRAND still ties technology to proprietary and excludes free and open. Free as
in libre and beer is best.

If Apple and Microsoft enter a new market (they are both new entrants to making
mobile phones - give it a month or two!) and they both refuse to negotiate a
FRAND licence for those essential inventions, then, of course, they should have
their access to that technology market shut down by injunctions.

If the US courts continue to defeat the international standards groups FRAND
position, then there will be no international standards for technology.

Companies like Microsoft and Apple will monopolise US technology markets, stifle
the technology in the US and then die. The rest of the world will move on. The
US cannot survive as a closed market if it wishes to continue to import cheap
technology and to sell to the much larger rest of the world market.

Just watch what is happening with Microsoft operating systems and Apple mobile
platforms. Still big in the US. Becoming irrelevant in the rest of the world.

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ 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 )