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
In a First, Seattle Judge Sets RAND Rate in MS v. Motorola ~pj | 352 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
In a First, Seattle Judge Sets RAND Rate in MS v. Motorola ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 27 2013 @ 03:15 AM EDT
Anybody favoring open standards should be happy as this verdict protects open
standards by upholding the FRAND promise the AVC/h.264 standard.
This verdict mean effectively that all standards made trough standardization are
protected by the technology promises made on them during the standardization
process. Now no participating company can withhold others access to the
technology for implementing an official standard.

It was Google/Motorola who were recanting on a promise made during a
standardization process by demanding billions of dollars for just a limited part
of the h.264 technology. And also demanding sales bans on product that included
the technology.

Even Groklaw should understand how any attack of Google/Motorola on open
standards is evil.

So yes anybody should be happy with this descision. If anything it would have
been preferable that the verdict had been for Google/Motorola to lose their
patent rights after recanting on their FRAND promise but this is the next best
thing.

Anybody oposing this verdict is likely against open standards or sponsored by
Google...

For once M$ made a break trough for open standards.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

In a First, Seattle Judge Sets RAND Rate in MS v. Motorola ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 27 2013 @ 09:26 AM EDT
I believe it was the right decision. Try again.

[ 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 )