Microsoft Charging Royalties For Linux

andydread writes "It seems Microsoft's campaign to scare manufacturers away from open source and Linux in particular is proceeding at full force. The latest news is from Digitimes out of Taiwan. Apparently Microsoft is threatening Acer and Asustek with having to pay Microsoft a license fee for the privilege of deploying Linux on their devices. This time, it's in the form of Android and Chorme OS. So basically, this campaign is spreading to PC vendors now. What are the implications of this? Does this mean that if I build PCs with Linux (Ubuntu/ChromeOS/Fedora) and sell them I am at risk of getting sued by Microsoft? "

Comments

Blowback

[symbolset]

Apparently in completely unrelated news, Asus is deprecating Windows Phone 7. This even though Google totally cleaned Garmin's clock on the free navi thing.

As always, Garmin-Asus seeks the best for our consumers either on Android platform or on Windows platform. However, we see the potential of Android platform devices, so we are focusing on Android platform currently. - Steven Tu

Meanwhile Microsoft's VP, Corporate Communications Frank X. Shaw is over on Twitter right now trying to repair the damage done by today's CNN Money report. In case y'all want to wander over and lend him a hand.

Re:Nicely twisted summary

[im_thatoneguy]

In regards to *which* patents are being contested we can probably look at the Motorola Lawsuit to see just what Asus is being expected to pay for:

Microsoft says Motorola is violating nine patents "that are essential to the smartphone user experience, including synchronizing email, calendars and contacts, scheduling meetings, and notifying applications of changes in signal strength and battery power."

So they aren't being sued for "linux" they're being sued for the software prebundled along with the kernel and cell phone related patents.

Asus denies it

[guyminuslife]

Here.

Terribly summary, by the way.

Re:Nicely twisted summary

[wvmarle]

Sorry to pull you back to the real world... any patent that has been issued and has not expired or invalidated, is valid. It's a simple as that.

Whether you think it's a legitimate patentable invention doesn't matter. As long as the patent office thinks it is, then the patent will be issued. If you think it's not valid for whatever reason, you will have to ask a judge to invalidate it. And until they agree with you and invalidate the patent, it is valid.

Re:Nicely twisted summary

[weachiod]

The whole story is bullshit too, as AsusTek has denied Microsoft asking for royalties.

Re:Nicely twisted summary

[the_womble]

Actually, the patent for the wheel was granted in Australia

Re:Nothing to do with Linux.

[DeBaas]

If Asus does not supply Exchange compatibility they will loose business. It is to many users an important feature.

They should sell the outlook compatibility as a separate app or license priced at roughly the cost of the license. That way they only have to pay for users that use the functionality as well as make clear that this is not them but MS which making you pay the 15 USD

Re:Nicely twisted summary

[dna_(c)(tm)(r)]

[...]patent license fees everyone else has already agreed are valid.

Europe, India, China. I think most inhabitants of our planet still live in jurisdictions that would not recognize such a patent.

Settling does not create legal precedent

[snowwrestler]

Settling a lawsuit does not create a legal precedent. When you settle a suit, what actually happens, legally, is that the plaintiff withdraws their complaint. As far as the court is concerned, the legitimacy of the claims was never examined and the case was never decided. So no precedent.