Lucent Sues Microsoft, Wants All 360s Recalled

robyannetta writes "Lucent has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft, demanding that they pull all Xbox 360s from the market. Lucent claims that Microsoft has violated their MPEG2 patents which they claim they patented in 1993." While it's unlikely console will be pulled from shelves, it's one way to generate some publicity.

Comments

The continuing problem of patents...

[Falcon040]

It shows the continuing problems of patents. Although patents were initially intended to stop techniques being kept secret or lost from the public or King in England, then extended with the intentions to assist the small inventor to protect itself from larger predators, it has done neither of these.

Patents are mainly used by the large companies to keep out competition. Competition being the only great thing that produces innovation and efficiency in a competitive capitalist economy that has served the world so well.

While patents continue to be a hindrance on new entrants to the market, Copyright and Design law, in additiona to Trademark law continues to help protecting innovation and innovative products while maintaining a
competitive capitalist economy, where continued competitiveness in a fair market is the most important factor contributing to a nation's lead in the world.

Re:The continuing problem of patents...

[gameforge]

I personally like how John Carmack relates software patents to getting mugged... to state loosely what he said, you think of the patent system as being in place to help the poor inventor guy who spends his whole life working on his one little invention, and then some large billion dollar company comes along and steals the idea and gets rich, leaving no credit to him. In that case, patents are great.

But if five companies hire five programmers to set out and do the exact same thing, the first one to make it to the patent office takes the cake and everyone else gets sucked into the legal blackhole (or just goes home with their tail between their legs).

It's definitely time to revisit our patent laws regarding technology; the industry moves too fast - patents like this literally stop innovation and cause consumers to pay out the ass for everything.

I agree that copyrights are a little more reasonable; it should be illegal to clone the next guy's solution; but it should not be illegal to solve the same problem.

Re:The continuing problem of patents...

[NMerriam]

Copyright law certainly does encourage creation of works -- what is bad is the ridiculously long periods for which copyrights are now granted. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I'm an artist/writer, my girlfriend is an artist/writer, we're friends with many, many other creative professionals. Every one of us is able to do what we do precisely because we can pay the bills, sell our work, and have it not be manipulated by others or outright stolen (on any large commercial scale).

That said, I don't know many creative professionals who think we need "protection" for decades after we're in the grave. While the original 14-year period of copyright might be ludicrously short for modern use (since oftentimes, especially when producing a series, it will only become commercially successful 10 or 20 years into the project), the idea that what we create will be disallowed as source material for several generations of future creators is equally ludicrous. As Picasso said, Good artists borrow, great artists steal. After a certain period, the works themselves become a part of culture that needs to be commented on through art, and saying that this arbitrary part of common culture should be off-limits is damaging to all.

Just because it is MS

[dcapel]

Just because it is MS does not change the fact that this is a patent-system absurdity, another reason why it should be overhauled. People are surprised when huge companies with an enormous portfolio of patents want reform; this is the reason the companies want it: they can't do the Mutually Assured Destruction scheme against small companies like they can eachother. One small company with a stupid patent can hold a company hostage.

I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but this evil is so bad we do not even wish it upon them. Abuse is abuse.

If you really want to follow the slashdot paradigm, then mod me down for my pro-ish MS remarks.

Sorry for the pun

[cflannagan]

I wonder if Microsoft would pull a 360 here.

Re:Sorry for the pun

[Funkmaster_G]

If they pulled a 360, they would be facing in the same direction as they started.

Re:Sorry for the pun

[Anonymous Coward]

If they pulled a 360, they would be facing in the same direction as they started.

But they'd be dizzier.

Not at all comfortable with the implications ..

[Entropy]

Wow. Suppose this were to happen with other electronics ..

I mean, how exactly are they supposed to really enforce such a thing? Would owning an XBOX 360 then be illegal? If that becomes precedent, that frankly scares the shit out of me. Ten years down the line, having some of my electronics retroactively made illegal to possess?

I'm no MS fanboy by the stretch of anyone's imagination - frankly I loathe them.

But given the wider implications here, I hope they get a partial victory out of this - such that people who allready have this equipment can keep it.

The Patent

[Mike deVice]

For those who like to read such things, the patent is right here.

It is long. Very, very long.

What a reliable source...

[MustardMan]

So instead of reuters or the washington post or, shit, even cnet, we get a nobody gamer site with an article that has no links to anybody credible. Brilliand reporting from slashdot, as usual.

Re:This is a nonsense article.

[afaik_ianal]

Yep, the linked article is unfortunately pretty light on both detail and factual accuracy. A much better source of information, with a reference to Lucent's patent is available here: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30743.

The patent being disputed is available here

Still, the original GamerNode link for this story is an amusing read, with gems such as, "Lucent claims that Microsoft has violated copyright patent laws". Uh.. What is a 'copyright patent law'? Are they trying to say that Lucent has the copyright on the patent laws? Or are they just confused about the difference between these two relatively unrelated concepts?

Sony's reaction

[this great guy]

Lucent (to MS): Microsoft, you violated our MPEG2 patent. We demand you recall all 360s. Now.
Microsoft: What !? We are afraid it's not going to be possible.
Lucent (angrily): Do it now ! Or we will sue you !
Sony (pointing his finger toward MS): LOLLLL Huhuhuhu Huhu !
Lucent (to Sony): You too !
Sony: Bastards...

Re:This is a nonsense article.

[TubeSteak]

If you had RTFA, you'd realize that their goal might not be to really get the Xbox360 pulled.

What would make the most sense (from a business perspective) is to force a settlement that involves a cash payout and licensing.

Licensing is like mana from heaven for companies. It represents a long term income stream that can only add to the value of the company and the value of their patent.

I can't imagine that Lucent wants an honest (and drawn out) court case.

Why big companies still like patents

[cyberjessy]

Its come to a stage where the biggies are using patents just to create an entry barrier for smaller companies and individuals. There can be no other reason why Microsoft would still want patents in place, considering that they have gotten hit over and over again, and again by patents which atleast violate the principle of common sense. Surely, MS (and most other companies which refuse to come out against patents) would have some game plan there.

I hope you Americans will use your vote to fix the broken patent system. I live in India, but if I want to build something I have to worry whether some jerk has patented the most obvious part of it, thanks to USPTO. I cant even imagine how they would judge the merits of a technical patent. Fuck.

Re:The question, of course is...

[voice_of_all_reason]

Does it matter of there's a box-like object in Ararat which looks like the Biblical Ark?

Why, actually, yes!

I gather there would be quite a few parties interested in a big ol' box of god that can shoot frikkin laser beams out of it.

//oh wait, wrong ark...

M.A.D. Software Patents

[Phat_Tony]

I thought that, among huge companies, the current insane state of the patent system functioned the way the superpowers did in the cold war- under the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. Since they all have thousands of patents covering every inane and obvious aspect of doing anything from writing software to building jets to flipping a hamburger to taking a piss, I thought they couldn't afford to start suing one another, because any suit would be met with a dozen counter-suits, and both companies would be assuring the annihilation of their profits into a bloody cataclysm of endless legal fees.

I understand how little extortion, er, "Property Management" firms can sue the likes of RIM, because they don't make or do anything but leech off anyone successful, so you can't threaten them with anything. Or a company on its last legs can make a crazy last-ditch effort to sue themselves into profitability, like SCO. But what's Lucent really doing here? Isn't Microsoft going to turn around and use it's double-click patent to try to make Lucent stop selling everything they make that involves a GUI at any point? Among thousands of other similar suits they could doubtlessly file covering every aspect of everything Lucent does.

Basically, what's Lucent thinking, and why doesn't MAD work here?

Re:All 360s?

[gabebear]

"MPEG2 and all MPEG related standards are "owned" by MPEG LA, who licenses the technology. It would be one thing if Microsoft deployed a product with MPEG2 playback capabilities without paying the license, but then where is Lucent in all this? Is this some crappy dredge up of a vague compression scheme like Unisys pulled?"

The patent covers one implemntation of encoding/decoding MPEG2 video, not the actual formating of the data in the file like the UNISYS case. The lawsuit is definately real and it looks like Microsoft is going to be handing a wad-o-cash to Lucent for this.

Think what would have happened if Jack Bresenham had patented all of his work...

Re:Yes, this does exist...

[jnadke]

It's called honesty.

Re:Too little too late?

[dbIII]

RIM lawsuit aside ...

Let me be the first to suggest a new name for this type of patent abuse solely to screw over other companies - RIMMING.

Re:Too little too late?

[LordOfTheNoobs]

Yes this is great. Huzzah, Die Microsoft.

Surely they are the only ones who have ever created an MPEG-2 compliant video device. Surely such a thing doesn't exist in _every_ Free movie player that exists.

You and many others might not care, but this is far more frightening for free video software ( i.e. mplayer totem etc ) than Microsoft.

This patent runs on linux to the whim of the shareholders of Lucent.