Google Loses. Microsoft Wins - 50% Android License Fees to MSFT

[Lucradia]

See it all: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/10/microsoft-collects-license-fees-on-50-of-android-devices-tells-google-to-wake-up.ars

That's not the last of it though. Oracle is still on Google's back too.

[ubupirate]

Microsoft is going on a rampage lately.

[sanderd17]

Why do they always attack with lawsuits instead of products.

I would like to see good competition between WP7, iOS and Android. But please no lawsuits. They don't produce anything good.

[Copper Bezel]

Good God. This protection racket crap is getting well out of hand. Can't Apple and Microsoft just begin to accept that they didn't invent computing? Why can't they just be reasonable competitors, like the device manufacturers themselves?


patents related to “implementing both long and short file names in the same file system,”

Lucky as hell for them that Bell Labs didn't patent, you know, files.

[rasmus91]

Unfortunately Microsoft consists of hundreds of greedy people.

I hate this kind of thing. There is only one reason for them to do this: Because they KNOW Google is delivering a better product than they ever will. And even worse; The consumers recognize this.

Companies acting up like this will kill everything good in their way just to make a few more bucks. I never got the general idea of such things.

This is so lame, they're basically "suing" another company for being successful. how lame is that?

I seriously fly into a rage when i hear about stuff like this. This is what makes me HATE Microsoft, I know that so many companies are just as bad, but it's simply a matter of principle.

I still use Windows for gaming, but my personal goal is to be Microsoft free when im switching this Laptop... seriously, im so sick of their stuff. Stuff like this makes me sick. Why, oh why do they have to do this? this is what makes me call Microsoft EVIL...

But i had better stop writing.

I promise though that im not gonna use Windows 8. I'll not buy another of their licenses. I've had enough. I seriously hope that people find out a way to install Linux on Windows 8 computers despite the UEFI boot loader signature thingie...

Go Linux! Go Ubuntu!

[rasmus91]

Why do they always attack with lawsuits instead of products.

Because Microsoft doesn't have software engineers. they invested all their money into lawyers...

[Lucradia]

Lucky as hell for them that Bell Labs didn't patent, you know, files.

I think... MSFT just broke my brain. I'm going to go put on a straight jacket and bang my head against the wall.

[Spice Weasel]

So a corporation that violated another corporation's patents is paying up. How does this effect anyone unless they are a Google or Microsoft employee and why should I care?

[grahammechanical]

Here is a link to a BBC web site article with the heading Mobile Patents Punch-up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15343549

It is claimed that patents protect innovation but perhaps restricting competition will hold back innovation.

Regards.

[cgroza]

So a corporation that violated another corporation's patents is paying up. How does this effect anyone unless they are a Google or Microsoft employee and why should I care?
Microsoft's case is absurd. Absurd things happen in my world. I care about that.

[ubupirate]

Microsoft's case is absurd. Absurd things happen in my world. I care about that.

This = +1.

[gsmanners]

Microsoft wouldn't exist if it had started in this type of environment. Their whole existence is a frightening example of shameless hypocrisy. I can only shake my head and wonder how long this criminal behavior is going to continue to be tolerated.

[dpny]

MS makes more money from Android licensing than from Windows Phone.

[Copper Bezel]

Microsoft wouldn't exist if it had started in this type of environment.
That's an overstatement, unless I'm misunderstanding you. They exist by selling software, and that software is proprietary, but proprietary software still competes "in the market, not in the courts." Software patents are a separate thing entirely. It's true that they only benefit the vendor corporations, to the detriment of consumers (and developers tend to hate them as much as anyone) but it's not true that the corporations themselves actually depend on them for anything.

As for why we should care - I think anyone with any interest in software design and consumer electronics should care. Software patents mean that the kind of products we have access to are dictated by yet another set of backroom deals, and the precedent set by punishing hardware vendors for alleged violations of software patents encourages those manufacturers to make use of software only if it's backed by a large corporation with a defensive patent portfolio. Even Google, who have one of those portfolios themselves, are vulnerable. That's a very bad thing for innovation; to compete, you have to be in the club. And fewer sources - or if MS had its way, one source - for those kinds of innovation means consumers have an increasingly small number of options.

[krapp]

MS makes more money from Android licensing than from Windows Phone.

Man I'm seeing some quality ironical posts lately.

+1

But wait this is probably actually true!

[dpny]

Man I'm seeing some quality ironical posts lately.

+1

But wait this is probably actually true!

Absolutely true: http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/27/microsoft-has-received-five-times-more-income-from-android-than-from-windows-phone/

MS makes five times the revenue from Android fees than from Windows Phone. Of course this is helped by the fact that no one has bought a Windows Phone.

[dniMretsaM]

What a sad, sad world this is to allow this type of thing to happen.


Absolutely true: http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/27/microsoft-has-received-five-times-more-income-from-android-than-from-windows-phone/

MS makes five times the revenue from Android fees than from Windows Phone. Of course this is helped by the fact that no one has bought a Windows Phone.

Wouldn't take one if I was paid.

[Bitrate]

Microsoft has no concept of innovation. They prefer to steal, harass and abuse their competitors instead of producing decent software. If the spineless US government had any balls they would have split this rampant monopolist of a corporation up but of course, money speaks louder than people's conscience.

[dpny]

What a sad, sad world this is to allow this type of thing to happen.



Wouldn't take one if I was paid.

Don't cry for Google: they chose Linux for Android not because they care anything for OSS, but because it was free and they needed to catch up to Apple. The entire purpose of Android is to push people to use Google services and sell your personal info to advertisers.

What I'm saying is that I don't know if there's much to choose between Google and MS. Google knew about the patent infringements, but thought they could get away with it. They were wrong.

[PC_load_letter]

I didn't have the time to go through the whole article, so could someone explain to me why is this the case? Did Google loose a recent lawsuit, or is it just the accumulation of Micro$oft mobster-like tactics collecting infringement fees from the Android phone manufacturers?

If it is the latter, then why doesn't Google go to court over this pile of B.S., will these patents hold their ground? I highly doubt.

[ubupirate]

Don't cry for Google: they chose Linux for Android not because they care anything for OSS, but because it was free and they needed to catch up to Apple. The entire purpose of Android is to push people to use Google services and sell your personal info to advertisers.

What I'm saying is that I don't know if there's much to choose between Google and MS. Google knew about the patent infringements, but thought they could get away with it. They were wrong.

Chrome OS is a Linux based OS, why isn't Microsoft going after Google for that?

Microsoft doesn't own any patents to Linux at all, so no infringement was committed.

[dpny]

I didn't have the time to go through the whole article, so could someone explain to me why is this the case? Did Google loose a recent lawsuit, or is it just the accumulation of Micro$oft mobster-like tactics collecting infringement fees from the Android phone manufacturers?

If it is the latter, then why doesn't Google go to court over this pile of B.S., will these patents hold their ground? I highly doubt.


You can Google (ha!) it if you want, as it's become very complicated. But Google went into this knowing the possibility of being sued. They just made the decision that it was worth the risk.

[MonolithImmortal]

Chrome OS is a Linux based OS, why isn't Microsoft going after Google for that?

Microsoft doesn't own any patents to Linux at all, so no infringement was committed.
If Microsoft didn't actually have any patents on Linux at all then if someone called them on one of their law suits and Microsoft came to court like "lol sorry we don't have anything" then they would charged for criminal extortion, or worse. Where there's smoke there's fire.

I'm not saying these patents aren't inane, or that these lawsuits aren't stupid, but it's perfectly legal, and honestly, Google knew this going into all of this. The gambled and they lost.

[dpny]

Google knew this going into all of this. The gambled and they lost.

Depends on how you define lose.

The object of Android is to drive people to use Google services so Google can see their info to advertisers. Ads are where Google makes money.

Currently, the combined Android phone makers are the second largest mobile OS vendor in the world, after Apple. If all those Android phones add up to more money coming in for Google than it loses on any legal settlements, it was a winning bet.

[MonolithImmortal]

Depends on how you define lose.

The object of Android is to drive people to use Google services so Google can see their info to advertisers. Ads are where Google makes money.

Currently, the combined Android phone makers are the second largest mobile OS vendor in the world, after Apple. If all those Android phones add up to more money coming in for Google than it loses on any legal settlements, it was a winning bet.
That's a very fair point. I just meant lost in the lawsuit department.

[dpny]

That's a very fair point. I just meant lost in the lawsuit department.

True. But I would hope that before deciding to launch Android, Google did a good cost-benefit analysis with a worst case scenario of losing all possible patent lawsuits. If they didn't. . .

[Mikeb85]

Currently, the combined Android phone makers are the second largest mobile OS vendor in the world, after Apple. If all those Android phones add up to more money coming in for Google than it loses on any legal settlements, it was a winning bet.

Android has more market share and more new phone activations than Apple... If you consider existing phones and not just new activations, RIM also has more market share. (Android #1, RIM #2, Apple #3) Apple is however first in revenue from phone sales (Samsung is first in volume).

[Mikeb85]

See it all: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/10/microsoft-collects-license-fees-on-50-of-android-devices-tells-google-to-wake-up.ars

That's not the last of it though. Oracle is still on Google's back too.

The second someone with the resources and the balls to challenge Microsoft (like say, Google) steps up and actually challenges Microsoft, it's over. Microsoft has no chance. And BTW, every phone maker who pays royalties to MS on Android also sells Microsoft devices, coincidence? The fact is, these deals are cross-licensing deals, with manufacturers who already sell Windows 7 phones... There's also a reason the full details of these deals are never disclosed (ie. they're not as one-sided as Microsoft claims).

There's still one big phone manufacturer who doesn't pay Microsoft, Motorola. I wonder why? Might have to do with the fact that they do have a patent portfolio that can stand up, but mostly has to do with the fact that they don't buy anything from Microsoft, so they have no incentive to simply roll over. And Microsoft has no incentive to actually take this to court, because they know they'll lose.

And the Oracle lawsuit is nonsense, it has no legs.

[Mikeb85]

Just did some quick research - Compal, the most recent Microsoft licensee, makes computers for Acer, Dell, HP, etc... No doubt their deal with Microsoft has to do with the fact they're making computers that run Windows, in addition to their Android devices.

[earthpigg]

That's an overstatement, unless I'm misunderstanding you. They exist by selling software, and that software is proprietary, but proprietary software still competes "in the market, not in the courts." Software patents are a separate thing entirely.

Yeah, and "C:\>" would have been called an "invention" had DOS 1.0 been released today - requiring that MSFT pay some scum $5 per backslash entered into a keyboard.

[Mikeb85]

That's a very fair point. I just meant lost in the lawsuit department.

Google hasn't lost anything. Manufacturers who use Android and also sell MS products simply agreed to license MS patents... When has Microsoft taken Google or any Android manufacturer to court, and actually been awarded a settlement by the courts?

[alexan]

From this article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15343549), I do like this argument


We all lose when the central competitive arena switches from serving customers to winning at high-stakes litigation


People is not choosing Microsoft, is choosing Google... but still people's money are going in Microsoft pocket.


The problem is not Microsoft, the problem are the Hardware Manufacturer which are cowardly putting people's money where they don't belong.


Everyone should totally boycott to famine companies which are rerouteing their client's money in MS's pocket.

[garth813]

This is so out of hand. Writing software is probably hard enough without having to worry about violating thousands of patents. I did hear something about an Ubuntu phone, I wonder if that just fizzled out, or maybe Microsoft and Apple just sued the hell out of it.

[sanderd17]

This is so out of hand. Writing software is probably hard enough without having to worry about violating thousands of patents. I did hear something about an Ubuntu phone, I wonder if that just fizzled out, or maybe Microsoft and Apple just sued the hell out of it.

Marc Shuttleworth mentioned in one of his posts that Ubuntu will be tablet-ready in a few releases, but that it will never be phone-ready.

So nothing going on here.

Btw, MS doesn't claim they have Linux patents, but Android patents. Android does use the Linux kernel, but there is a whole lot of functionality on top of it that can be patented.

[Grenage]

Blame the patent system and company agreements, not the companies. Leave 5 kids in a room with knives, and who can you blame when they use them?

The business world is rather cut-throat, and they're all in it to win it - as it should be.

[blueturtl]

Am I the only one who finds comfort in the thought that Microsoft gains more revenue from leeching off its competitors than from it's own products?

Windows/Office are their key assets and nothing they do can change that. Once Windows/Office crumble it is all over for them. They've been riding their lucky break for long enough.

Buying Android is still better than buying Nokia/Windows Phone... As far as patents go there is nothing new or outrageous here.

[alexan]

Am I the only one who finds comfort in the thought that Microsoft gains more revenue from leeching off its competitors than from it's own products?

Windows/Office are their key assets and nothing they do can change that. Once Windows/Office crumble it is all over for them. They've been riding their lucky break for long enough.

Buying Android is still better than buying Nokia/Windows Phone... As far as patents go there is nothing new or outrageous here.
I don't think Microsoft is just taking money away: it will be stupid consider that, afterward, Microsoft actually need those companies to produce their next smartphone/tablet (Samsung is getting close to Apple sales share every day).


My hypothesis is that Microsoft is not taking money from them... but instead "giving" sort a pre-order for Windows mobile license.

Practical example:
> Samsung sell 10 android phones, for each device sold they pay 1$ of "patenting protection" (read: Mafia)
> Microsoft take 10$ (10 devices x 1 dollar) and give back 10 "free" pre-order Windows Mobile license.
> When Windows Mobile will come out, Samsung will get 10 "free" W.M. phones license while other are supposed to pay (but without MS's protection)

Basically this scenario could even work if Samsung is enough stupid. Consider that Samsung could easily build their own OS (or contribute more/fork to Andorid) with all their money wasted in MS's pocket :lolflag:


It may be a puzzling scenario, but it is also to consider that the hostory of computing if filled by companies that play really stupid while trying to be smart4ss (Xerox's mouse as gift for Apple//QR-Dos to Bill Gates... etc.etc.)
:lolflag:

[rasmus91]

Of course this is helped by the fact that no one has bought a Windows Phone.

Ehem... that's not funny. Not the least bit. I know a guy who did, and he was convinced I would give up Android after seeing what Windows phone 7 could do.

(pssst. i didn't!)

[zekopeko]

The second someone with the resources and the balls to challenge Microsoft (like say, Google) steps up and actually challenges Microsoft, it's over. Microsoft has no chance. And BTW, every phone maker who pays royalties to MS on Android also sells Microsoft devices, coincidence? The fact is, these deals are cross-licensing deals, with manufacturers who already sell Windows 7 phones... There's also a reason the full details of these deals are never disclosed (ie. they're not as one-sided as Microsoft claims).

And yet most thought it wasn't smart to challenge Microsoft. Some of those deals are probably of the cross-licensing variety but from the available information it looks like Microsoft is the one that is getting payed. That should tell you which side has the higher ground a.k.a. better patents.


There's still one big phone manufacturer who doesn't pay Microsoft, Motorola. I wonder why? Might have to do with the fact that they do have a patent portfolio that can stand up, but mostly has to do with the fact that they don't buy anything from Microsoft, so they have no incentive to simply roll over. And Microsoft has no incentive to actually take this to court, because they know they'll lose.

You are misinformed. Microsoft is suing Motorola. Motorola's patent portfolio apparently wasn't impressive enough for Microsoft not to do it. Even Samsung is paying and they have over a 100 000 patents around the world.


And the Oracle lawsuit is nonsense, it has no legs.

If the lawsuit had no legs they wouldn't be scheduling a trial.

[dpny]

Android has more market share and more new phone activations than Apple... If you consider existing phones and not just new activations, RIM also has more market share. (Android #1, RIM #2, Apple #3) Apple is however first in revenue from phone sales (Samsung is first in volume).

Apple is the largest single smartphone vendor. It sells more phones than any single Android manufacturer. Samsung's latest figures are for devices shipped, not sold.
All of the Android manufacturers, as a platform, sells more smartphones than anyone else.
All iOS devices together--iPhones, iPods, iPads--make Apple the largest mobile OS vendor in the world. Apple has sold over 200 million iOS devices.

[dpny]

Google hasn't lost anything. Manufacturers who use Android and also sell MS products simply agreed to license MS patents... When has Microsoft taken Google or any Android manufacturer to court, and actually been awarded a settlement by the courts?

Microsoft has taken Google to court: that's what the lawsuits are about.

The handset manufacturers are making their own deals because Google has chosen not to defend Android. This is in opposition to Apple's response when app makers started to get sued. Apple said, essentially, "if you want to sue our app developers you have to go through us." Magically, the lawsuits stopped.

[Mikeb85]

Microsoft has taken Google to court: that's what the lawsuits are about.

The handset manufacturers are making their own deals because Google has chosen not to defend Android. This is in opposition to Apple's response when app makers started to get sued. Apple said, essentially, "if you want to sue our app developers you have to go through us." Magically, the lawsuits stopped.

But Microsoft has not actually gone to trial, and WON a lawsuit vs. Android yet. That's key. They've merely made deals with manufacturers who also sell MS products. Motorola doesn't pay them a dime.

[dpny]

But Microsoft has not actually gone to trial, and WON a lawsuit vs. Android yet. That's key. They've merely made deals with manufacturers who also sell MS products. Motorola doesn't pay them a dime.

The handset manufacturers are basically betting that Google will lose. Google is, too, or else it would've stepped up to defend the handset manufacturers.

As I said above, if the combined Android platforms bring in more revenue via ads than Google ends up paying out with lawyers fees/settlements, then it's still a net win for them.

[fishandchips]

What's interesting about this thread are the people that openly support and excuse Microsoft in their patent-troll endeavours. **sniff** I'm sure it brings a tear to Ballmer's eye and gladdens his little heart to know of your continued support and understanding. :rolleyes:

Has Microsoft ever said which patents Android infringes upon?

How many are obvious and prior art in origin?

Because of the NDAs will we ever see for ourselves?

[alexan]

Indeed, lot of big mouth around UF lately


Microsoft has taken Google to court: that's what the lawsuits are about.

The handset manufacturers are making their own deals because Google has chosen not to defend Android. This is in opposition to Apple's response when app makers started to get sued. Apple said, essentially, "if you want to sue our app developers you have to go through us." Magically, the lawsuits stopped.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/wikipedian_protester.png


:lolflag:

[Mikeb85]

You are misinformed. Microsoft is suing Motorola. Motorola's patent portfolio apparently wasn't impressive enough for Microsoft not to do it. Even Samsung is paying and they have over a 100 000 patents around the world.

We'll talk when Motorola pays Microsoft (not going to happen).




If the lawsuit had no legs they wouldn't be scheduling a trial.

Oracle is just patent trolling, over something that Sun open-sourced years ago.

[Mikeb85]

The handset manufacturers are basically betting that Google will lose. Google is, too, or else it would've stepped up to defend the handset manufacturers.


No, they're just hedging their bets. Something that investors do all the time. It doesn't mean you expect your own investment to go down, just that you're not willing to lose your shirt to find out.

And Google has stepped up, by giving patents to some of their manufacturers. Even IBM has lended IP to the cause...

[sanderd17]

Oracle is just patent trolling, over something that Sun open-sourced years ago.

Software patents have nothing to do whatsoever with copyright or open-sourcing of code.

[dpny]

No, they're just hedging their bets. Something that investors do all the time. It doesn't mean you expect your own investment to go down, just that you're not willing to lose your shirt to find out.


You're right: I typed that in a hurry to leave the house and realized I misspoke.


And Google has stepped up, by giving patents to some of their manufacturers. Even IBM has lended IP to the cause...

I don't know if I agree: looking at their public language, I think they really were taken by surprise. Compare their public responses to those of Apple and MS in similar situations.

[dniMretsaM]

Don't cry for Google: they chose Linux for Android not because they care anything for OSS, but because it was free and they needed to catch up to Apple. The entire purpose of Android is to push people to use Google services and sell your personal info to advertisers.

What I'm saying is that I don't know if there's much to choose between Google and MS. Google knew about the patent infringements, but thought they could get away with it. They were wrong.

Not related to my post, but still true.

[Mikeb85]

I don't know if I agree: looking at their public language, I think they really were taken by surprise. Compare their public responses to those of Apple and MS in similar situations.

I definitely think they were taken by surprise. Google is all about engineering and innovation, they don't seem to be quite as organized on the legal or PR departments as the companies that are suing them. But they have deep pockets, an even deeper understanding of software engineering, and determination.

Another thing to keep in mind is that historically, when software patent lawsuits have gone before a judge, the plaintiffs have lost the vast majority of cases.

[dpny]

[img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/wikipedian_protester.png[/img

Apple steps in: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-06-13/tech/30059847_1_apple-developers-app-store-companies-for-patent-infringement

The result has been to send Lodsys looking elsewhere for patent violations, Compare Apple's response to that of Google:

"The Foss Patents blog correctly points out that Google’s patent request is too little too late, because it “doesn’t provide app developers with a basis on which they could simply ignore Lodsys’ letters and take the risk of being sued.” Still, it’s a start."

http://smedio.com/2011/08/15/google-finally-supports-android-developers-against-lodsys/

[dpny]

But they have deep pockets, an even deeper understanding of software engineering, and determination.

I think this is, ultimately, what they're counting on. However, MS has deep pockets as well.

:popcorn:

[Mikeb85]

Don't cry for Google: they chose Linux for Android not because they care anything for OSS, but because it was free and they needed to catch up to Apple. The entire purpose of Android is to push people to use Google services and sell your personal info to advertisers.

What I'm saying is that I don't know if there's much to choose between Google and MS. Google knew about the patent infringements, but thought they could get away with it. They were wrong.

Google also uses Linux in all their servers and most of their desktops. And Chrome OS. They also offer Linux (desktop) versions of all their tools and products. I'm sure their familiarity with it also swayed their decision. And Google has also open-sourced much of their software (albeit on a different license). BTW, Google is actually one of the largest Linux and OSS supporters in the corporate world.

[dpny]

Google also uses Linux in all their servers and most of their desktops. And Chrome OS. They also offer Linux (desktop) versions of all their tools and products. I'm sure their familiarity with it also swayed their decision. And Google has also open-sourced much of their software (albeit on a different license). BTW, Google is actually one of the largest Linux and OSS supporters in the corporate world.

I'm not saying Google doesn't use Linux: clearly they do. I'm not saying there aren't people working at Google who acre deeply about F/OSS. I'm saying that Google, the corporation, uses Linux because it's cheap/free, and Google's number one priority is selling your personal info to advertisers. Don't forget that.

[Mikeb85]

I think this is, ultimately, what they're counting on. However, MS has deep pockets as well.

:popcorn:

Microsoft also has a long history of losing when they actually go before a jury and judge.

[dpny]

Microsoft also has a long history of losing when they actually go before a jury and judge.

True.

Do we have enough :popcorn:?

[Mikeb85]

True.

Do we have enough :popcorn:?

Nope. I need to get some more.

Seriously though, the patent system in the US and many other countries is very, very broken. Many patents that are granted are incredibly vague, and never tested. And this favours the large players, who can drag a lawsuit on much longer than small competition, encouraging out of court 'settlement'. The good news is of course, that most plaintiffs in these cases lose.

[dpny]

Nope. I need to get some more.

Seriously though, the patent system in the US and many other countries is very, very broken. Many patents that are granted are incredibly vague, and never tested. And this favours the large players, who can drag a lawsuit on much longer than small competition, encouraging out of court 'settlement'. The good news is of course, that most plaintiffs in these cases lose.

Agreed.

[Linuxratty]

. I can only shake my head and wonder how long this criminal behavior is going to continue to be tolerated.

I think it will always be tolerated,at least in the good ol' USA. If the powers that be did not approve,they would have stopped this years ago.

[ubupirate]

I think it will always be tolerated,at least in the good ol' USA. If the powers that be did not approve,they would have stopped this years ago.

Stop and think for a moment.

They probably don't approve of it, but are being paid off to look the other way.

[Lucradia]

They probably don't approve of it, but are being paid off to look the other way.

Kind of like Lobbying.

[Linuxratty]

Stop and think for a moment.

They probably don't approve of it, but are being paid off to look the other way.

I'd go with this as well.

[KiwiNZ]

Android is to Linux and OSX is to BSD.

Also Android is not subject to a 50% fee, it is 50% of Android devices are subject to a fee, a big difference.

[dpny]

Android is to Linux and OSX is to BSD.

Also Android is not subject to a 50% fee, it is 50% of Android devices are subject to a fee, a big difference.

Funny thing about this is that it gives MS incentive to see Android do well.

[Mikeb85]

Android is to Linux and OSX is to BSD.

Also Android is not subject to a 50% fee, it is 50% of Android devices are subject to a fee, a big difference.

A voluntary one at that...

[alexfish]

What a sad, sad world this is to allow this type of thing to happen.



Wouldn't take one if I was paid.

I would . Meet me by a wishing-well

PS , its a secret where the phone is going and the words to go with it, but it will not take much to guess

[zekopeko]

We'll talk when Motorola pays Microsoft (not going to happen).

You are moving the goal posts. You claimed that the moment somebody opposes MS their case would fall apart. I have yet to see that happen.


Oracle is just patent trolling, over something that Sun open-sourced years ago.

Oracle would be patent trolling if they didn't have products of their own and that is obviously false. Sun only open-sourced parts of Java. They required a license for mobile use.

[Mikeb85]

You are moving the goal posts. You claimed that the moment somebody opposes MS their case would fall apart. I have yet to see that happen.

I didn't say that Microsoft would give up. But yes, when any of their MS vs. Linux or Android cases actually go before a judge and jury, they will lose. Up until now manufacturers have simply made cross licensing deals with Microsoft because they also sell MS products.



Oracle would be patent trolling if they didn't have products of their own and that is obviously false. Sun only open-sourced parts of Java. They required a license for mobile use.

Try convincing a jury of that. Oracle will lose.

This case basically comes down to whether or not Dalvik infringes on any Sun patents, and will also test the validity of said patents (Google worked around the license requirements by using their own VM, so it's a patent case). Already many of Oracle/Sun's patents have been already been dismissed from the case, and it looks like the case will indeed go before a jury...

[alexan]

Apple steps in: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-06-13/tech/30059847_1_apple-developers-app-store-companies-for-patent-infringement

The result has been to send Lodsys looking elsewhere for patent violations, Compare Apple's response to that of Google:

"The Foss Patents blog correctly points out that Google’s patent request is too little too late, because it “doesn’t provide app developers with a basis on which they could simply ignore Lodsys’ letters and take the risk of being sued.” Still, it’s a start."

http://smedio.com/2011/08/15/google-finally-supports-android-developers-against-lodsys/



Microsoft has taken Google to court: that's what the lawsuits are about. [[still citation needed]]

Link provided by poster:

http://smedio.com/2011/08/15/google-finally-supports-android-developers-against-lodsys/
(friendly note: check the title of your own sources next time)
which avoid:
The handset manufacturers are making their own deals because Google has chosen not to defend Android.
To edit with: Google has chosen to defend Android.

Still no reference to this:

This is in opposition to Apple's response when app makers started to get sued. Apple said, essentially, "if you want to sue our app developers you have to go through us." Magically, the lawsuits stopped.
"Official media" (still waiting for your resources) report that patent vs Apple is still on the way (currently "wait and see").
Instead "stop" I think you could use "pause" or "on break"... but I wouldn't see apple (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/application-purchase-ecommerce-advertising-ios-android-blackberry-windows-phone-lodsys,news-12806.html) so relaxed as you're try to depict it ;)

(btw: Lodsys is most unlikely to stop anything so far now.. since looks like Microsoft employers (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/could-lodsys-turn-its-sights-on-microsoft-windows-8-developers/11056) are too puzzled about it)

still missing source to this:

Microsoft has taken Google to court: that's what the lawsuits are about.

[forestfarms]

Stop and think for a moment.

That makes my head hurt. It's easier just to repeat what other people say.

[dpny]

To edit with: Google has chosen to defend Android.

I pulled out the money quote: "The Foss Patents blog correctly points out that Google’s patent request is too little too late, because it “doesn’t provide app developers with a basis on which they could simply ignore Lodsys’ letters and take the risk of being sued.”

Android has, as far as I know, done the least if can in defending Android, which is one of the reasons the handset manufacturers are making their own deals. This, to me, is a continuation of their problematic approach to Android, in which it seems they want to get maximum gain with putting forth minimal effort.


Instead "stop" I think you could use "pause" or "on break"

That is better wording. However, I will bet you that no Apple app makers will ever have to pay a dime because of Apple's aggressive defense.


still missing source to this:

Perhaps it is my wording you object to. Microsoft has reached agreements with several Android handset manufacturers. It is pending litigation against at least two others. I am using "Google" as a metonym for "Android handset makers" for a reason: Google is the actual target as the developer of Android. MS is merely taking the easiest path to do what damage they can do to Google. I wouldn't be surprised if, at the end of the process of getting Android handset manufacturers to sign licensing agreements, MS moves against Google itself, using the agreements as de facto proof of Google's patent infringements.

[zekopeko]

I didn't say that Microsoft would give up. But yes, when any of their MS vs. Linux or Android cases actually go before a judge and jury, they will lose. Up until now manufacturers have simply made cross licensing deals with Microsoft because they also sell MS products.

What makes you think they will lose? Patent lawsuits usually have around 50-60% chance of being in favor of plaintiff (at least in the US).


Try convincing a jury of that. Oracle will lose.

I doubt Oracle is going to have a problem with that. Google pretty much says, on record, they took Sun's IP while being fully aware they should have licensed it. All Oracle needs to do is paint Google as playing fast and loose with other people's property.


This case basically comes down to whether or not Dalvik infringes on any Sun patents, and will also test the validity of said patents (Google worked around the license requirements by using their own VM, so it's a patent case). Already many of Oracle/Sun's patents have been already been dismissed from the case, and it looks like the case will indeed go before a jury...

Google might have worked around Sun's licensing requirements but they didn't work around Sun's patents on Java. Oracle's patents haven't been dismissed AFAIK. Large amount of patent claims has been which are part of every patent. There was something like ~180 patent claims so the judge decided to limit that number to lower double digits so the trial doesn't last for months on end. It doesn't mean patents were invalidated. At least that is how I understood it. If you have sources stating otherwise please provide them.

[Mikeb85]

What makes you think they will lose? Patent lawsuits usually have around 50-60% chance of being in favor of plaintiff (at least in the US).

Software patent wins are much, much lower (less than 10%).



I doubt Oracle is going to have a problem with that. Google pretty much says, on record, they took Sun's IP while being fully aware they should have licensed it. All Oracle needs to do is paint Google as playing fast and loose with other people's property.

What's really in question is Dalvik. Java and Java ME are GPL, Java that isn't GPL'd is what Sun charges money for (because developers don't necessarily want to GPL their own applications). Android went a 3rd route, by using Harmony, a Java implementation developed by IBM and others that uses the Apache license, and creating their own VM (Dalvik) to avoid Sun's licenses and patents. So it really comes down to whether or not Google was able to work around Sun's patents. Considering how many former Sun employees they have, I'd say they probably did their homework.



Google might have worked around Sun's licensing requirements but they didn't work around Sun's patents on Java. Oracle's patents haven't been dismissed AFAIK. Large amount of patent claims has been which are part of every patent. There was something like ~180 patent claims so the judge decided to limit that number to lower double digits so the trial doesn't last for months on end. It doesn't mean patents were invalidated. At least that is how I understood it. If you have sources stating otherwise please provide them.

You're right, it was complaints that were dismissed, my bad (patents would only be outright challenged during the trial itself). But it's still a positive for Google. They can paint Oracle as a patent troll, they can try to invalidate Oracle's patents, and as a last resort, they can claim ignorance, claiming that they didn't know Harmony infringed. I simply see way too many outs for Google, and I don't think Oracle can convince a jury to side in their favour.

As an aside, I am very surprised that Google didn't just buy Sun. Would have saved them alot of trouble.

[Ric_NYC]

It looks like Linux is going to be history in a few years.

Developers working "for free" and their work going to the pockets of Microsoft.

[dpny]

As an aside, I am very surprised that Google didn't just buy Sun. Would have saved them alot of trouble.

Completely different core competencies. Sun made and sold stuff. Google sells info to advertisers. Google wouldn't have know what to do with Sun.

[Sendo Eevpix]

Great... I am not into phones that much... But now I won't be able to try and get an Android with out profits leaking to Microsoft?... Just great.

I am trying to steer clear from that Monopoly, but there now fining every 'legal' reason to kill off all competetors is proving my point to my friends who still 'pities' me for using Ubuntu, about Windows not caring about you, but cares about your money, problems. :(

[zekopeko]

Software patent wins are much, much lower (less than 10%).

I read some article that has that number. IIRC most of the litigation was coming from patent trolls aka non-practicing entites. They could be skewing the statistics because of that.
In the same article it was mentioned that if the company is making products, the number climbs to ~50% but it was unclear if that number is for companies making mostly hardware or software.


What's really in question is Dalvik. Java and Java ME are GPL, Java that isn't GPL'd is what Sun charges money for (because developers don't necessarily want to GPL their own applications). Android went a 3rd route, by using Harmony, a Java implementation developed by IBM and others that uses the Apache license, and creating their own VM (Dalvik) to avoid Sun's licenses and patents. So it really comes down to whether or not Google was able to work around Sun's patents.

Java is GPL with a special Classpath exception. Meaning you don't have to GPL any code that links to Java's libraries.


Considering how many former Sun employees they have, I'd say they probably did their homework.

If anyone of Sun's employees invented patents that Oracle is suing over and worked on Dalvik that could mean, if Oracle wins, triple damages because the infringement would be intentional.


You're right, it was complaints that were dismissed, my bad (patents would only be outright challenged during the trial itself). But it's still a positive for Google. They can paint Oracle as a patent troll, they can try to invalidate Oracle's patents, and as a last resort, they can claim ignorance, claiming that they didn't know Harmony infringed. I simply see way too many outs for Google, and I don't think Oracle can convince a jury to side in their favour.

You do understand that only the best claims remained because of that selection process? Ignorance doesn't excuse you when you brake the law, especially someone as big as Google that can afford top-notch lawyers.


As an aside, I am very surprised that Google didn't just buy Sun. Would have saved them alot of trouble.

I bet they are regretting it since the moment Oracle filed the lawsuit.

[inobe]

microsoft tends to win little and lose a lot, a lot, a lot!

http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html#law

and that's old stuff.

[Thewhistlingwind]

It looks like Linux is going to be history in a few years.

Developers working "for free" and their work going to the pockets of Microsoft.

The fights not over yet. Microsofts patents haven't been tested in court. And Attacking Motorola is now impossible because it puts them in direct confrontation with Google.

[alexan]

This will be the Year of... Microsoft :P



:lolflag:

[fatality_uk]

As no-one here know the details of any legal agreements undertaken between Microsoft and Android handset suppliers (I stand to be corrected if someone does) then jumping up and down about Microsoft being the evil bad guys just looking for a quick buck is pure speculation.

The companies who are giving Microsoft a license fee are not mom & pop operations who would rather give 1% of something than risk a trial. HTC's lawyers must have checked undertaken due diligence and read that Microsoft has a case and therefore HTC were bound to pay a license fee.

[vasa1]

The downside of Microsoft’s Android dollars (http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2011/10/25/the-downside-of-microsofts-android-dollars/)

[leclerc65]

Microsoft Throws More Lobbyists Into the Ring to Ban Linux Phones. (http://techrights.org/2011/10/25/association-for-competitive-technology-vs-android/)

[vasa1]

Microsoft Throws More Lobbyists Into the Ring to Ban Linux Phones. (http://techrights.org/2011/10/25/association-for-competitive-technology-vs-android/)

From the link: Microsoft front group Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) = 1984 Orwellian-style doublespeak.

[dpny]

[I]This will be the Year of... Microsoft[/I

It's always the year of Microsoft.

[Mikeb85]

As no-one here know the details of any legal agreements undertaken between Microsoft and Android handset suppliers (I stand to be corrected if someone does) then jumping up and down about Microsoft being the evil bad guys just looking for a quick buck is pure speculation.

The companies who are giving Microsoft a license fee are not mom & pop operations who would rather give 1% of something than risk a trial. HTC's lawyers must have checked undertaken due diligence and read that Microsoft has a case and therefore HTC were bound to pay a license fee.

No one knows for sure, but alot of stock market analysts have made educated guesses, and the consensus is that they are cross-licensing deals, in which manufacturers pay a 'license' fee for Android handsets, in exchange for cheaper Microsoft products. This looks especially likely considering every company which pays Microsoft to use Android also sells Microsoft products.

[Mikeb85]

And while everyone is trying to litigate Android out of existence, another milestone for Android: http://www.pcworld.com/article/242519/android_overtakes_ios_in_app_downloads.html

[alexfish]

Looks like everything is in place for MS and Nokia
Nokia takes on Apple with launch of Windows phones (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=nokia%2Bnew%2Bphone%2Breleased&source=newssearch&cd=1&ved=0CC0QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Ftechnology%2 F2011%2Foct%2F26%2Fnokia-launches-windows-phones-to-combat-apple-and-android%3Fnewsfeed%3Dtrue&ctbm=nws&ei=Kv-oTviTEdGy8QODovD_Cw&usg=AFQjCNGlTq2wf34_9J6TlvXXRBX_4jxBrA&cad=rja)

Just wondering how long it will take for MS to bully the Service Providers ( will it become another MS Tax on Providers)

[Mikeb85]

Looks like everything is in place for MS and Nokia
Nokia takes on Apple with launch of Windows phones (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=nokia%2Bnew%2Bphone%2Breleased&source=newssearch&cd=1&ved=0CC0QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Ftechnology%2 F2011%2Foct%2F26%2Fnokia-launches-windows-phones-to-combat-apple-and-android%3Fnewsfeed%3Dtrue&ctbm=nws&ei=Kv-oTviTEdGy8QODovD_Cw&usg=AFQjCNGlTq2wf34_9J6TlvXXRBX_4jxBrA&cad=rja)

Just wondering how long it will take for MS to bully the Service Providers ( will it become another MS Tax on Providers)

I don't think the service providers care about Microsoft. Their business doesn't really rely on Microsoft the same way as say, Samsung would (they sell PCs, and a few Windows phones). Nokia will probably get some love because they've been selling phones for a very long time and people know them (still wish they kept Meego, it looked fantastic), so I have no doubt MSFT will increase their market share through Nokia, but I doubt they can make the carriers stop marketing Android phones.

For all of Apple's tricks and litigation the phone carriers around here advertise only Android and (much less) Windows phones. Margins for the carriers on Apple products sucks, so salespeople don't push them.