Authored by: Kilz on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 08:21 AM EDT |
Microsoft asked for the rate to be set by the court, not
Motorola. Microsoft therefore has the burden of proving what
it should be as I understand it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: lnuss on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 08:35 AM EDT |
Keep in mind that Microsoft bears a burden that they caused by refusing to
negotiate at all. Had this litigation come after good faith negotiation
attempts, then there'd be more point to it, but as it is it looks as if MS is
just wanting to tilt the playing field heavily in their favor.
---
Larry N.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mcinsand on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 09:35 AM EDT |
Microsoft had a burden of negotiating in good faith as part of following the
RAND process. They basically ran crying to Mommy that mean, old Motorola was
being a bully by following well-established global procedures. Motorola was
being a jerk by treating Microsoft fairly.
Microsoft is getting to be more and more like Apple every day.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cjk fossman on Wednesday, May 01 2013 @ 02:40 PM EDT |
Microsoft is acting as if they have an _entitlement_ to be
in the mobile phone market.
They don't.
They have the rights to pay Motorola's original asking
price, to negotiate a lower price and pay it, work around
the patents, or stay out of the mobile market.
Microsoft should stick to what it does best, which is ...
sorry, kind of lost my train of thought there.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 02 2013 @ 04:30 PM EDT |
First off I'm not a lawyer but here my
understanding.
Microsoft is the plaintiff and Motorola is
the defendant. My understanding is that
the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.
In the areas where they fail or the
defendant raises sufficient doubt, then
the defendant" wins" and the court has to
rule in the defendant's favor in those
areas.
Now the sufficient doubt is at different
levels depending on what type of case it
is.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Thursday, May 02 2013 @ 07:17 PM EDT |
It's a legal thing. Microsoft is the only
one asking for a rate. Motorola's position was
that the judge had no authority to do this.
So that makes Microsoft the plaintiff on
this issue, and the plaintiff always has
the burden of proof.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|