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."
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
What exactly does the european patent office have to do with a US patent suit?
Any relevant action by a foreign patent office must be promptly disclosed to the US PTO (37CFR 1.97, 1.98). In other words, it's required by law.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Are you kidding? I have a HTC Wizard phone (TI OMAP-850) which is full of cool stuff: IRDA, bluetooth, 3G/EDGE, WiFi, 1.2M camera, qwerty keyboard, etc.. I know these are not impressive specs right now but they were 4 or 5 years ago. If you asked me the question: -what can you do with it? I would answer NOTHING!
It was not good as phone, that is, the user interface was not designed for it. I was much much faster taking of my dumb phone out from my pocket and write a text message using t9 than to go through all the menus in windows mobile, launch the messaging program, slide the qwerty keyboard, wait for the screen to rotate and finally write the message. We can argue the hardware was slow, but the truth is that Microsoft made the BIG error of having the software and hardware division separated by a huge Berlin wall. I disassembled the firmware and ended up realizing that it was compiled for the previous generation of ARM CPU, the Wizard's CPU is a ARMv5 and windows mobile was built for generic ARMv4!!! They (HTC probably) could have made the software adequate for the hardware they were selling but they didn't care. Even Linux with a small desktop manager runs faster on my HTC Wizard than the original firmware!!
It was not good as a internet device, the integrated Internet Explorer was slow, and difficult to use with a pen, a real pain in the ass. I preferred to wait and see some article at home instead of accessing it "right away" through the phone using GPRS.
Activesync was a horrible thing, you cannot imagine how much contacts I lost during a sync. Syncing through exchange was also a nightmare, I can never forget this message: "there was a change in the server, all the data in your phone needs to be deleted and synced again". WTF???
The integrated windows media player was another design stupidity, believe it or not, I had to use VLC (a port of it) because windows media player wasted my battery in less then one hour.
It had an integrated "office" suite which, truth to be told, was completely useless - at least for me.
The only thing I found useful on that phone was using third party instant messaging programs which actually worked well (much better than msn messenger). Other thing that worked well was playing games which actually used the pen interface quite well.
The device at the time cost 600 euros, I paid less than half for it in a ebay bid. Still, I feel it was one of the biggest scams of my life, I just still keep it because it runs Linux and is useful for robotics applications. I hope you feel through my wording how pissed off I still am!
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