Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Wants $15 Per Android Smartphone

sfcrazy writes "Microsoft Corp has demanded that Samsung Electronics Co Ltd pay $15 for each smartphone handset it makes based on Google Inc's Android operating system. The software giant claims to own a wide range of patents used in the mobile platform. From the article: 'Samsung would likely seek to lower the payment to about $10 in exchange for a deeper alliance with Microsoft for the U.S. company's Windows platform, the Maeil Business Newspaper quoted unnamed industry officials as saying.'"

27 of 361 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Microsoft Research by grub · · Score: 4, Informative


    You, Microsoft has a huge legal division expert in the following subjects

    - Barratry
    - Intimidation
    - Patent trolling

    ftfy

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  2. Fuck Microsoft Research by airfoobar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If their R&D is so awesome, why can't they make their own products and not resort to ripping off other businesses to make money?

    1. Re:Fuck Microsoft Research by Virtucon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You obviously don't understand business nor did you read the article. This isn't a research item this is a patent item. To a company a patent is an asset that can be used in trade or to beat a competitor over the head. Research doesn't necessarily lead to great inventions and what makes us think that Microsoft invented the inventions that they now own? Lots of companies buy and sell patents just like you or I would sell a used bicycle. I have four patents and one, from a job I had more than 15 years ago, has traded hands no fewer than 8 times. Did any of the interceding owners of that patent "invent" anything? No, but they owned the rights to that patent and presumably made money by selling it.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:Fuck Microsoft Research by airfoobar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do understand business, but I couldn't care less about entertaining big business's patent trolling activities. I also understand that patents (and particularly software patents) have nothing to do with invention or innovation and need to be abolished -- something you illustrated perfectly in your comment.

    3. Re:Fuck Microsoft Research by airfoobar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ripping off competitors is what the patent trolls do -- they can't do, so they sue -- just like Microsoft is doing in this case. As for copying IP and waiting to be sued, there's a deeper reason why that happens: it's almost impossible to bring a product to market without infringing dozens upon dozens of completely random patents. Even if you try to play it safe and license some of the patents likely to be used against you, the licensing fees you'd have to pay would almost certainly exceed your entire product development budget! How we can expect small startups to survive in this environment is totally beyond me.

    4. Re:Fuck Microsoft Research by airfoobar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me, but as far as I'm concerned the problem is, a patent does not mean anyone innovated, even the original owner of the patent. Patents are just a way to block competition and extract rents for trivial and vague "generalities" (like you say in your comments). This can't be good for anyone except the big-business rent-seekers; certainly not good for new entrants and the consumer.

  3. Windows Phone by FrankSchwab · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How much does Microsoft want to license Windows Phone OS? My understanding is...around $15.

    So, $15 to license Windows Phone 7 with a bunch of software that Microsoft paid to develop and has to maintain along with patent licenses, or $15 to license Android that doesn't contain a single line of Microsoft code but needs the patent licenses? I'm sure their patents are worth something, but this seems a wee bit overpriced.

    --
    And the worms ate into his brain.
    1. Re:Windows Phone by Locutus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I believe this is some of Barnes and Nobels defense. ie they are asking more than it costs to license their entire OS stack so therefore it is an unreasonable license fee and is designed to block use of the software( Android ). Blocking can bring them back into court for anti-trust. Remember, they are associating WP7 with both Xbox and other Microsoft services and software.

      no doubt many have already decided to give Microsoft the money instead of fighting them and only a very few are fighting. Too bad those fights will be dragged out for years.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    2. Re:Windows Phone by surmak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wonder if there are antitrust implications of licensing the patents for that same price that they sell the software for.

    3. Re:Windows Phone by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Funny
      WP7 Mango Edition...

      Android's features from a year ago...coming in only four months from now! I'm so excited! I just love nostalgia.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  4. Thickets of Patents all litigated in East Texas by Virtucon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Eventually this will wind up with either Samsung entering a "mutual" royalty agreement where undisclosed patents are licensed by guys in trenchcoats, on a bridge, in fog.

    Or, they'll go into court and to to patentville USA Marshall TX where every scumbag patent thicket group brings their IP litigation. It's friendlier in East Texas y'all.

    It's the cost of doing business I guess.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Thickets of Patents all litigated in East Texas by deadhammer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's a solution to this, of course: refuse to do business in Marshall, TX. Don't open stores there, don't sell phones there, don't allow people with IP addresses from that range into your app store, and insert a catch-all clause in your EULA that you don't support users from Marshall. That way you've removed yourself from their jurisdiction and you can't be sued there. Repeat with each new lawsuit haven that springs up.

      --
      I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
  5. So by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Funny

    They really do lots of research, and should enjoy the results aswell.

    Why did they put these benefits in Android and not in Windows?
     

    --
    Deleted
  6. What exactly are these patents? by Archtech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone know exactly what Microsoft's patents involve? Without knowing that, it's hard to make sense of any of these stories.

    Based on the published newspaper articles so far, though, I must say it looks as if patent law is being used to accomplish the exact opposite of its supposed intent. Rather than guaranteeing an inventor the sole enjoyment of revenue from its innovations for a period, it is being used by a company that is not a serious player in the market to impede others from selling their products - and to give it a substantial stream of wholly unearned revenue.

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    1. Re:What exactly are these patents? by GNUman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Patents are mentioned and refuted in Barnes & Noble's response ( http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/MSvB&Nanswer.pdf ).

      They include:

      (in parenthesis: page and paragraph in document where validity of patent is put in question)

      Patent 5,778,372: "Remote Retrieval and Display Management of Electronic Document with Incorporated Images". This refers to loading the text of a web-page before the background image. (page 16, paragraph 33)

      Patent 6,339,780: "Loading Status in a Hypermedia Browser Having a Limited Available Display Area". This basically treats putting the "Loading" message inside the page area instead of the toolbar. (page 16, paragraph 32)

      Patent 5,889,522: "System Provided Child Window Controls". (page 17, paragraph 34)

      Patent 6,891,551: "Selection Handles in Editing Electronic Documents". (page 17, paragraph 35)

      Patent 6,957,233: "Method and Apparatus for Capturing and Rendering Annotations for Non-Modifiable Electronic Content". (page 17, paragraph 36)

      Patents 5,579,517 and 5,758,352. Dealing with file name compatibility between different OS (page 14, paragraph 29)

      Patents 6,791,536 and 6,897,853. Simulating mouse inputs without a mouse (page 15, paragraph 30)

      Patent 5,652,913. Shared data structure for storing input/output data (age 16, paragraph 31).

  7. Re:Microsoft Research by oakgrove · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, because surely Slashdot doesn't have hundreds of thousands of unique visitors some of which hold the former view and some of which hold the latter. It's just one guy in his basement. And you. And me.

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  8. Re:Microsoft Research by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. No one has. Patents are a scam, a hindrance to innovation and the free market. They must be ABOLISHED.

  9. Re:Microsoft Research by cjb658 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think I recall that site. It said that Microsoft's only innovation in user interfaces was the combo box -- which is a terrible design.

    Like the one used to assign mod points? Oh, the irony!

  10. Re:Fight! by erroneus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes. This seems like a reasonable business choice. $15 is a ridiculous figure. I have heard that figure is what Microsoft charges for their own mobile OS. This certainly doesn't seem to be "reasonable and non-discriminatory" licensing. I say fight too. Also, it's a little entertaining to see all the crap go down as it has been. There seems to be a massive increase in [software] patent litigation and I have to wonder when everyone playing the game will finally realize we are all better off without it.

  11. Re:Microsoft Research by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So when Apple sues Samsung, everyone cheers and claims Apple has every right to defend it's patents.

    Where was this? Around here the torches and pitchforks were waving about how you shouldn't be able to protect 'look and feel'.

    There's plenty of hypocrisy here, you just found the wrong example.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  12. Re:Microsoft Research by oakgrove · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm more inclined to believe Slashdot gives IBM a pass is because, unlike MS, they don't have an arrogant jackass for a CEO that goes around laughing at their competitors and intentionally crashing competitor's products at trade shows. The guy is a no-class buffoon. That's probably got a little something to do with why Slashdot seems to have a collective chip on its shoulder towards MS vs other mega-corps.

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  13. Re:Microsoft Research by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a game of poker. You have to pay to play.

    Here's what I think. If any patents used to make such threats turn out to be bad or unsupportable, they get converted to charges of extortion.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  14. Devil's Advocate by pavon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If Google is allowed to make Android available to anyone for free, then why shouldn't Microsoft be allowed to competitively price their mobile OS at $0 as well? From that point of view it costs $15 for the mobile patent licenses either way, and WP7 is thrown in for free.

  15. Re:Welcome to Phase 3. by ErikZ · · Score: 3, Funny

    How do you know being a racist that sleeps with underage women isn't the height of enlightenment or saintly behavior?

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  16. Re:Microsoft Research by digger1985 · · Score: 5, Informative

    How about Jobs deliberately misquoting Samsung even after Samsung had publicly corrected it? http://blogs.forbes.com/elizabethwoyke/2011/03/02/oops-steve-jobs-misquotes-samsung-at-ipad-2-event/ How about Jobs laughing at their competitors and calling them copy cats? http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/steve-jobs-slams-android-samsung-and-ipad-2-rivals-as-copycats-50003016/ AND then going ahead and blatantly copying Android notification system. Yep, year of the copy cat it is. Except this time it's Apple doing the copying.

  17. Re:Microsoft Research by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Informative

    The fact that something is re-invented multiple times in isolation is the very definition of obvious.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  18. Re:Microsoft Research by Stormwatch · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why? It's a fact, patents hinder innovation -- history shows that.