AOL Patent Deal Means Microsoft Now Holds Vestiges of Netscape

inode_buddha writes "It's part of the $1 billion AOL patent deal, and it's something that would have made many minds explode back in the 1990s. It still makes my mind explode today. Marc Andreesen points out that MS now has a significant chunk of the old Netscape. What are the ramifications for Mozilla?"

Comments

Nothing.

[Sigvatr]

Nothing.

Re:Nothing.

[Old97]

Except this is about patents - not copyrights.

Re:Nothing.

[dmacleod808]

Dialup... service? What is this?

Re:Nothing.

[slack_justyb]

I totally agree with parent. Firefox has absolutely nothing to worry about here. Not only for the fact that Microsoft has enough fights on its hands as is, but that if it wanted to start a war in the browser space, it would get schooled by the DOJ and then they'd (DOJ) start poking their heads into all of Microsoft's other battles.

Additionally, the is very little technology that is common between Firefox and Netscape. Firefox has evolved past it's 0.8 code and so for there to be anything left in Firefox that is a major bit from Netscape would be a big surprise.

Re:Nothing.

[icebraining]

and no bandwidth caps. :-)

Yeah, but 50kbps * 1 month is only ~16.43 gigabytes, and that's if you could run it at full throttle 24/7. It caps itself.

Re:Nothing.

[Ihmhi]

Dialup... service? What is this?

It's like the Internet on your Droid, but it's over a landline and you use a computer instead of a smart phone.

Nothing, if Microsoft is smart.

[Microlith]

Or, if Microsoft is stupid, they'll leverage the patents against other browsers and open up a nice new series of anti-competition complaints. But as we've seen over the last 10 years, MS has gotten very, very careful about not treading into areas that could open up a new round of such suits, and very subtle in their anti-competitive behavior so as not to draw attention from the DoJ.

I'm sure MS would love to lock out all browsers but IE from Windows 8, like Apple can on iOS, but MS burned themselves there before. I'm sure they'd love to lock out the ability for users to boot non-Windows platforms on x86 PCs, like they do on ARM. But that too would draw an unending stream of complaints (though I think the ARM lock out should as well, against all vendors.)

The question to be asked is how MS will use these patents to raise fees on Android, and if they'll go around demanding more "Linux licenses" like they did in 2007.

Re:Nothing, if Microsoft is smart.

[Anonymous Coward]

With the exception of Opera they are not actually alternate browsers. They are safari with some different buttons at the bottom. Apple does not allow other browsers on the app store.

Opera gets away with it because of that minifying thing they do where they MITM each page.

Re:Nothing, if Microsoft is smart.

[Reapman]

All alternate browsers must use the Safari rendering engine - in short you can get a fancy front end, but not a new backend (like say Firefox's backend, or Opera, etc) Note that Opera's Mini browser gets a pass since most work doesn't occur on the device, but Opera's backend servers. You can't get the "real" Opera browser on the phone.

Unless somethings changed in the last year, I can't port Opera or Firefox or Chrome over, etc

Re:Nothing, if Microsoft is smart.

[Reapman]

Don't remember telling you if you should care or not. Question was asked and I provided the answer. If that offended your fanboyism I apologize.

But while on the topic - We all know how well only having one Web browser (IE6) worked out for everyone. And if you're providing anecdotes - Safari runs like crap on Windows.

Patents shmatents.

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> Marc Andreesen points out that MS now has a significant chunk of the old Netscape. What are the ramifications for Mozilla?

Not sure how much those patents would be worth to anyone, given that Netscape was unable to use them to defend against IE in the 1990s.

Re:Patents shmatents.

[cpu6502]

Netscape actually did beat Microsoft in the antitrust case. (Unfortunately it bankrupted them, and forced Netscape to sell-off to AOL.)

MicroScape NaviPlorer?

[dryriver]

NetSoft InternetEscaper? Netcraft MicroScapeExplorer? MicroCape NetExCavator? A strange marriage, this on... I'll just stick to using FireFox, thank you...

Re:business as usual

[OakDragon]

if you can't beat them, buy them

Beat them and buy them.

MS is competing with Apple and Google, not Mozilla

[TheGoodNamesWereGone]

MS isn't terribly worried about the browser wars any more. They're far more afraid of Apple and Google; witness the abortion that is Metro on W8 and their mad rush to 'converge' the desktop with the tablet. Idiocy? Perhaps. It's certainly a slap in the face to every desktop user.

Re:Peter Kafka is NOT Marc Andreesen

[Locutus]

exactly but they would leverage existing licensing contracts for force the "licensing agreement" just as they've done with most of the Android signers. If you noticed, most of them already licensed and sold Microsoft Windows based products so they were already licensing Windows. Now that they've basically lost the FAT patent they need something to replace it and as you suggested, an SSL patent might be a good one.

LoB

Microsoft wasted cash, look forward a few months

[s.petry]

I know most people only think of Netscape with browsers, but I have most of the original Source from the various Netscape projects somewhere.

Netscape back then had an impressive LDAP server, Identity Management Server, Application server, Key servers, Proxy servers, as well as the framework for the web browser. Netscape was huge, and in to lots of technical areas that most people think of as standard services. Netscape was literally the gateway for SunOne Directory server for example.

The age of the patents has to put them close to expiration. This is the first "WTF" when talking about paying such a high price for AOL patents. The next WTF is that most of the Netscape patents were open sourced long long ago. Meaning that the patents have no value (Assuming that UC vs. AT&T would be considered valid case law example, which it has been repeatedly.). I fail to find value in what they bought, at least that goes beyond a year or two.

I'm not a fortune teller, but here is what I see. Microsoft is going to start trying to sue everyone. They see the writing on the wall, hell even our Windows guys at work say "Microsoft will be out of business in 4-5 years" and are trying to learn Linux. Zune was way to late, WinPhone is something nobody wants, XBox is still a huge money sink, and people have no desire to keep buying the same OS and Office products for way more money than they are worth from them.

I see this is a drowning company flailing in the water. I hope they prove me wrong, but then again we in the business know how they have been since day 1.

Old Netscape joke

[frank249]

Back in the day, Netscape was going to merge with Yahoo! and move their headquarters to Israel. The new company would be called NetandYahoo!

Why Software Patents Won't Go Away

[TheNinjaroach]

This billion dollar expenditure to buy something as silly as software patents is the #1 reason why they won't go away. Big business has too much invested in software patents to let some pesky government go about changing the rules. Meanwhile, small business suffers for it.