Microsoft, Amazon Ink Kindle and Linux Patent Deal

theodp writes "Microsoft says it has reached a wide-ranging IP agreement with Amazon in which each company has granted the other a license to its patent portfolio. Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's Kindle — including open-source and proprietary technologies used in the e-reader — in addition to the use of Linux-based servers. Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment. 'We are pleased to have entered into this patent license agreement with Amazon.com,' said Microsoft's deputy general counsel. 'Microsoft's patent portfolio is the largest and strongest in the software industry, and this agreement demonstrates our mutual respect for intellectual property as well as our ability to reach pragmatic solutions to IP issues regardless of whether proprietary or open source software is involved.' A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal."

Comments

Anti-trust anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

If all copyright holders on software patents start to create bilateral agreements, it will eventually become clear that software patents are only an artificial entry barrier.

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[Pojut]

...it will eventually become clear that software patents are only an artificial entry barrier.

Like they already aren't?

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[HungryHobo]

To be fair they really are.
Without patents:

1: I write some nice software and sell it.
2a: I make a little money, not enough to quit my day job.
2b: I don't make money, all I've lost is time.

With patents:
1: I try to research previous patents, they're almost unreadable..... I have no money to hire a patent lawyer(barrier to entry one)... so I can't be certain if my idea has already been patented.
2a: I stop for fear of infringing on someones patent and being sued into the ground.(barrier to entry 2)
2b: I keep going and write my app... it might be infringing but I don't think it is....
3a: I make a little money.
3b: I make no money.
4: Someone sues me.
5a: It is infringing- well they pull out records that yes I did view their patent in the course of my research in step 1 and obviously stole their idea. They get tripple damages I lose my house. (barrier to entry 3)
5b: It is not infringing - so what. I don't have the money for a good lawyer, they win I lose my house.(barrier to entry 4)
5c: It is not infringing - by some miracle I win.... I'm still left with a pile of legal bills and I lose my house.(barrier to entry 5)

In theory the patent system could help me by letting me be just like the guys who sue in the above but I don't have the thousands of dollars it takes to get a patent through nor the time.

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[Inconexo]

I heart that at an RMS conference years ago. Software patents mean nothing to big companies, who have enough patents to do patent-crossing (I think that was name). Little developers, on the other side, can't take advantage of them, since they have no patents to trade.

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[chaim79]

Eh, it's not that bad. in Wisconsin (or at least my part of it) it costs $150 to register a company as a LLC. That's a fairly low barrier.

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[HungryHobo]

You mean if you don't have money and a group of like minded people to organise with?

we've gone from something you can do in an almost offhand manner(create a product) where ther only skill and knowledge required is technical in nature to having to find people to incorperate with,incoperate,hire lawyers or know enough to avoid getting screwed by the poeple you're incorperating with, hire lawyers to defend you in patent cases...etc etc etc do you really not think these are real barriers to entry?

Re:Anti-trust anyone?

[c-reus]

2d. A patent troll discovers you. You get sued. You lose all your money. The end.

Sounds one-sided to me

[Akido37]

Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.

Microsoft says the agreement covers technologies in products such as Amazon's Kindle

A Microsoft representative declined to say which of its products are covered by the deal.

It sounds like Amazon got caught violating one or more of Microsoft's patents, and this deal was arranged to avoid a lawsuit.

Embrace, Extend, yada yada

[FartKnockerz]

Microsoft's traditional play of "Extend, Embrace, Extinguish"..

This most likely has something to do with a Microsoft play towards Windows 7 Mobile and a slate device as an answer to Apple's iPad . Pundits are spewing about Windows 7 Mobile and the fact that it sucked less in comparison to Windows Mobile 6 (in the vein that Windows 7 sucks less than Vista). Said device would be hooked into Amazon's range of eBooks for the Kindle.

Lie down with the dog, wake up with the fleas

[Richy_T]

So long Amazon, it was nice knowing you.

This speaks volumes

[HangingChad]

Microsoft issued a news release celebrating the accord, while Amazon declined to comment.

Sometimes which dog is barking tells you a lot about what's going on out in the pasture.

Re:You Know What Else This Means ...

[autophile]

Will we see the death of Microsoft's .lit format [microsoft.com] in favor of Kindle's .azw?

Oh, I hope not. Both formats suck compared to epub, and azw (i.e. mobipocket) is an extremely stripped-down version of html. Lit at least has more html functionality. But I hope both formats die.

My own take is that Microsoft wants to put out an ebook reader which will probably use Amazon's patents, so Microsoft probably told Amazon "Nice patent portfolio you got here. Be a shame if it burned down. You should have insurance!"

Re:Microsoft patent racketeering

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose using the US legal system for patent extortion is especially cost effective since msft uses offshore labor for the legal work

More to the point, the US legal system is designed to make exploiting the law for profit easy -- for the elite who have the priveledge and resources to do it.

The more complex and ambiguous the law, the more lucrative and exploitable the law is for those who design the law. Not only does complexifying the law justify insane amounts of power and revenue just to manage it all, but it ensures that there is always a winning move for the legal elite.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, the US legal system is the most complex and ambiguous legal system in the entire world. That's no accident, and it's obviously not "by the people, for the people".

Re:You Know What Else This Means ...

[poetmatt]

oh, so you mean the ones never substantiated?

That secret, submarine patent

[badger.foo]

It struck me that Microsoft over the last few years has made a series of deals with other corporations over patents, but in each case

• whatever is published is too unspecific to interpret
• Microsoft's announcement mentions Linux in vague language, with the intention of making it sound less than legit

What then, if that secret, submarine patent is about something else entirely, or for that matter, does not even exist? For that matter, there could be several threats in play, patent based or otherwise, but anyway the main point of any such deal is to make sure the non-Microsoft party stays quiet, leaving Microsoft free to create the impression that Linux is somehow not quite legit, with no factual basis whatsoever.

We have no way of actually knowing, but it does appear that the US legal system somehow allows the kind of of behavior I suspect here as long as the actual underlying facts are not available to the public.

It doesn't even have to be a patent or a real issue at all, given the likely size of Microsoft's legal budget the threat of prolonged litigation backed up by the famous PR machine would be quite sufficient to intimidate smaller players to silence. Most of us are, after all, smaller players than Microsoft.

All idle speculation of course, but as long as they keep us in the dark about the facts of these deals, speculation will flourish.