Slashdot Mirror
B&N Responds To Microsoft's Android Suit
eldavojohn writes "You're probably familiar with Microsoft's long running assault on Android but, as noticed by Groklaw, Barnes and Noble has fired back saying, 'Microsoft has asserted patents that extend only to arbitrary, outmoded, or non-essential design features, but uses these patents to demand that every manufacturer of an Android-based mobile device take a license from Microsoft and pay exorbitant licensing fees or face protracted and expensive patent infringement litigation.' Barnes and Noble goes on to assert that Microsoft violates 'antitrust laws, threatens competition for mobile device operating systems and is further evidence of Microsoft's efforts to dominate and control Android and other open source operating systems.' The PDF of the filing from two days ago is rife with accusations including, 'Microsoft intends to utilize its patents to control the activities of and extract fees from the designers, developers, and manufacturers of devices, including tablets, eReaders, and other mobile devices, that employ the Android Operating System.' and 'Microsoft has falsely and without justification asserted that its patents somehow provide it with the right to prohibit device manufacturers from employing new versions of the Android Operating System, or third party software.' Barnes and Noble does not mince words when explaining Microsoft's FUD campaign to both the public and developers in its attempts to suppress Android. It's good to see PJ still digging through massive court briefs to bring us the details on IP court battles."
We have over the years seen giants like even IBM carefully thread around Microsoft, pussyfooting while Microsoft uses a chainmail. Its very refreshing to see Barnes and Noble taking the leaf out of their mouth and speak out, saying what everyone already thinks but wouldnt dare say.
If this keeps up, the discovery phase could be very interesting. Imagine getting subpoenas out to Motorola, HTC, Samsung and the others being extorted for specifics about their collisions with Microsoft? I would imagine that being of enormous interest to the EU and the DOJ.
HTTP/1.1 400
In Microsofts case i imagine the problem lies more with their reputation than their product. WP7 is behind the times, lacks many basic functions people take for granted in a smartphone and are just a "me too" product.
But, their biggest problem is that people regard Microsoft as a backwards, boring and utterly crappy company unable to release good products. Anyone who ever used a Windows Mobile Phone shy away from WP7 like a beaten dog from a stick. Anyone who has used Windows more or less expect WP7 being about as interesting as Windows 7 or Vista. The brand Microsoft is tarnished to the point almost no marketing in the world can save it.
HTTP/1.1 400
'Microsoft intends to utilize its patents to control the activities of and extract fees from the designers, developers, and manufacturers of devices, including tablets, eReaders, and other mobile devices, that employ the Android Operating System.'
It would be a strange system where a patent holder couldn't do these things. What precisely does B&N think patents are for?
"His name was James Damore."
Given the extraordinary broadness and obviousness of the patents mentioned in the filing, It would appear that an extraordinary variety of software released in the past ~25 years, probably including Android, does violate them. It would also appear that none of them should have been granted.
'the “display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster,”' Wow. Feel the innovation...
Right -- it's the patent system. Some of us are living in (well, kinda) democracies. So fighting the patent system *starts* with a PR battle.
Let everyone know that *patent matters*. Don't let those dirty robber barons do their thing in the cozy dark. Shout, yell, tell everyone.
Don't go sit in a corner, slowly shake your head and mumble "they are too strong". Fight.
Patent protection is valid even if you are not the most qualified or successful at implementing your ideas. indeed that's the point.
Indeed that's true but...
They don't seem to be arguing that the patent was obvious and incorrectly awarded.
No, that's exactly some of the claims B&N is making, they cite prior art on numerous sections.
FTA
30. During the discussions, Microsoft also threatened Barnes & Noble with claims of infringement of the ’536 and ’853 patents which relate only to simulating mouse inputs using non-mouse devices. The ’853 patent misrepresented the state of the art at the time the patent was filed by stating that “a need exists for permitting a user to perform all operations of a mouse-type device using a stylus.” This, however, is demonstrably incorrect. The ’536 and ’853 patents were filed in November 2000. Long before that time, numerous systems had been developed that enabled computer users to simulate mouse behavior with touch input devices. For example, U.S. Patent No. 5,327,161 to Logan et al., entitled “System and Method for Emulating a Mouse Input Device with a Touchpad Input Device” (the “’161 patent”), was issued in 1994, years before the ’536 and ’853 patents were even filed.
They also use various other afirmative defenses including alledging anti-trust patent collusion with Nokia, and attempted extorsion through thinly veiled threats of litigation. Those past two parts I think are the really interesting part of this. If B&N succeeds at proving that part of the defense, the whole "sue Android out of our way" strategy MS is using will be shut down completely. The part you are refering to, that the patents were used improperly, is, from what I can tell, part of the evidence towards the bad faith negotiations they were making and adds to the anti-trust defense. But it's just a part of the anti-trust allegation and not the whole of it.
PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide