B&N Sought DoJ Inquiry Over Microsoft Patents
Meshach writes "There's an interesting story at the WSJ about how Barnes & Noble lobbied the Justice Department to open a new antitrust probe against Microsoft regarding their abuse of the patent system. B&N saw Microsoft filing a slew of frivolous patents in order to stop the development of handheld devices, potentially affecting their Nook reader. The article mentions how Microsoft has a similar racket going with various Android device manufacturers, but B&N does not have the cash reserves to support similar licensing, and is fighting back."
Reader qantr points out related news: Chinese telecoms firm Huawei has confirmed that Microsoft is demanding royalty payments over products running Android.
Support B&N with your wallets. Most of all, don't buy Microsoft products.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
that B &N is showing MS that they have balls which other big companies like Samsung , HTC din't. It doesnt matter whether B & N succeed or not atleast they have shown the intent to fight Troll called MS. This could be the next David Vs Goliath fight.
What they're doing is avoiding a lawsuit against Google, and instead going after licensees of Android. If they went after Google, Google would fight it and thus reveal the origin of the inventions they are claiming.
They come to some arrangement, which looks like it's really a fake agreement (e.g. you pay us $45 million, and we pay you $45 million back in marketing and discounts - which is what the Samsung deal is rumoured to be). They they present the payment to them as a license fee for Android to create a false cost associated with Android.
All done under NDA so the details of the fraud are not revealed and investors are kept in the dark.
Depends. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, and if the patents in this case are needed to stay interoperable with the Windows environment, and the fees demanded border to extortion (i.e. the product is no longer competitive with Microsoft's product), then I suspect the DOJ might find that interesting.
the android companies that have caved into MS and paid them. Hopefully B&N and Google/Motorola will win out over MS, while those companies that signed with MS will be forced to continue paying.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
And in ten years, once Microsoft has destroyed Android and taken over it's place in the market for billions in revenue, the case might finally finish winding through the courts. We've been here with Netscape. Legal action runs at a snail's pace compared to most industries - but in the fast-moving world of technology, it's glacial.
Did you know they both sell products which run Microsoft Windows? Do you think they might talk about how those licensing fees would go up sharply if they were not to play this Android game. Seeing how they _require_ an NDA before even telling the vendors what patents are being infringed, these kinds of contracts only get exposed in court documents or leaked.
So that is just a couple of ways Microsoft strong arms companies the size of Samsung or General Dynamics. And don't forget, Microsoft strong armed Intel into shutting down a software division they were running which did Java and multimedia software. It's pretty well known by the older geeks how Microsoft got its market and has kept its market and it was not because they competed on product quality. IMO
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
"I figure there actually has to be something substantial in those patents to merit virtually all the big names in Android phones agreeing to license them at the amount MIcrosoft has been asking."
Agreed, IMO the issue at hand isn't whether Microsoft has valid patents, I think it very likely does else firms would be less likely to sign agreements with it, I think the issue is that Microsoft is abusing NDAs and so forth to prevent anyone telling the world what the patents are so that they can re-write software to not infringe on Microsoft's payments.
Effectively Microsoft is doing it's best to encourage continued infringement so that people have to license. IMO that should be grounds to lose rights to a patent - you should either be open about infringement and give people the opportunity to avoid it or license it, or lose the right to the patent altogether, not trap people into infringing and then force them to pay up. That really is protection racket type tactics.
Both parties interested in talking want the NDA.
If you feel you're being shaken down for money, signing an NDA doesn't benefit you. Would you sign an NDA with an extortionist?