German Court Grants Motorola Xbox and Windows 7 Sales Ban

First time accepted submitter Celexi writes "In a surprising move, Motorola Mobility (which is to be taken over by Google), has won an injunction preventing the distribution of Windows 7 and the Xbox in Germany until Microsoft starts paying royalty fees for the patents Microsoft is said to be infringing (two patents used to display H.264 video). The ruling is suspended as of now because of a restraining order, the effect in the rest of the EU and U.S. if the ban is enforced if the restraining order is lifted, is unclear." This could go into effect as soon as May 7th, pending the result of the next U.S. case hearing.

Comments

Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[indiegamer]

In a surprising move, Motorola Mobility (which is to be taken over by Google), has won an injunction preventing the distribution of Windows 7 and the Xbox in Germany until Microsoft starts paying royalty fees for the patents

They are unhappy that Microsoft is, legally and reasonably, getting almost 1 billion an year from various other Android manufacturers because they are using Microsoft licensed technology. After Google acquired Motorola I've been sure and waiting for them to try to hit back at Microsoft and Apple. Motorola is good for Google because it acts as both proxy in patent wars (so that Google name itself doesn't get the damage) and because then Google can control the whole Android infrastructure from the OS to devices.

It is no wonder that other Android vendors have been worried about Google's plans. At least Microsoft strictly provides the OS for manufacturers to use. Google has its own hardware manufacturer too. If I ran a smart phone making company I would never use Android as Google just can't be trusted. At least use MeeGo or something similar open, or license WP7 from Microsoft. You can also always create your own OS.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Microlith]

legally and reasonably

Legally maybe, but reasonably?

Microsoft licensed technology

Were you cheering for them as they trolled companies using Linux and demanded they pay for "Linux licenses?"

At least use MeeGo or something similar open

And if you were even remotely successful Microsoft would still threaten you. Patents are just one of Microsoft's weapons to wield against competitors.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Quiet_Desperation]

You can also always create your own OS.

You'd certainly save money that way by not needing to create and app store or even publish an API due to zero demand.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you pot high? Microsoft installed their own man as nokia's ceo and now nokia is microsoft's mobile hardware arm.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[poetmatt]

Wow, you really don't put much effort into the pro-MS/anti google posting, huh? Couldn't even hold until the 9th word, doing the first post on the article, *and* couldn't hint about being pro-microsoft about 4 times, right?

using a patent shakedown for extortion with manufacturers is legal and reasonable? Getting a billion a year though would certainly be in the realm of antitrust concerns though. Why do you think MS just settled with B&N for more than B&N was worth? Hint: it wasn't to work with them, and had everything to do with getting B&N to drop the case when they had MS by the balls.

Android vendors were worried google would give preference to Motorola, not "google's plans". As of so far, google is simply carrying on doing what it does day to day and not giving Motorola priority. Had they given Motorola priority you'd hear of every manufacturer aside from Motorola jumping ship faster than you could post an article about it.

I would never use MeeGo or WP7. MeeGo is just not developed enough and WP7 is from a company that violates antitrust on a daily basis (and has been convicted). Why would anyone consider either of those?

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Billly Gates]

This was dumb, assuming Google bought this patent from Motorolla as MS has a huge patent portfolio. Samsung is fine and wont be assholes to you unless you pull an Apple and try to ban its products. Then it got really nasty.

MS has not threatened Google and its patent fees from Andriod makers are only .02% according to Ars Technica. They have no intention of starting a war. But Google will soon see Redmond firing its guns claiming IP over exchange synch ability, and many other IP and copyrighted standards. Billions lost in defending itself will come next. It is in both companies best interests not to go sue crazy. It is the same thing I did with my exwife when I could have got a lawyer, but so would she and then shit would hit the fans for both of us and both of us would loose.

May God help us if Oracle wins the case and ruling syntax in a clean room implementation is the same as copyright infringement. Simple using something like socket() would be owned by someone else and this would give MS a lot of leverage for any phone but Windows that tries to talk to Exchange or use Javascript (MS bought rights to Javascript from AOL who bought Netscape).

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[alen]

are you pot high?

executives move to different companies all the time. so if i work for MS i'm not allowed to change jobs? Did novell install their man in google to make google novell's software arm? Did compaq install tim cook at apple to help them?

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's "reasonable" for MS to extort money using patents (at a cost higher then what they sell their entire os), how is it not reasonable for Motoralla to do the same to MS? Logic fail? Also, Google does NOT own Motorola yet.

Also, Android (while spearheaded by Google) consists of a large group of companies. What Google sells is not android but the platform on top of it (Google apps integration). They can all EASILY fork Android if they feel uncomfortable with Google. That said, phone manufacturers are hardware companies, not software. The thing is, most cell phone hardware are pretty much the same more or less and most users take much more notice of the software. They need something like Android in order to compete so it's not like they will abandon Android rather then rolling out their own. Using something like MeeGo lack the marketing already in place (meaning spending an insane amount to match it) while having a great risk. The same goes for windows currently though that may change if MS steps up the game. That said, there is no risk to using Android(other then MS patent trolling) while having a mature platform that lets them compete *NOW* rather then the uncertain future.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[awrowe]

Oh yeah, cos Microsoft can be trusted, they have proved that repeatedly over the years.

Good ole trustworthy Microsoft

I'm neither a Google fanboy or a Microsoft shill. I like Google as a company and I enjoy a lot of their products and I use a lot of Microsoft products as well. The only thing these companies can be trusted to do is look after their bottom line. Any other community based action they take is a plus and has an expected life span of about a millisecond. You could turn around and find it gone with no explanation or comeback whatsoever.

As far as Android goes, I would choose it over iOS and WP7 in a heartbeat, simply because I like the platform. I am currently waiting for Windows 8 to come out so I can plant it on my Acer W501 tablet, where I think it will excel. Kinda wish I got the A500 though, cos it looks a better platform again.

Don't talk about trust when it comes to companies. The word is almost meaninless when applied to them.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[norteo]

As a software developer, I say, so far, "Reasonably" and "microsoft" have never really made sense in the same sentence. Microsoft is dieing on his own poison. Microsoft may not have its own hardware manufacturer but has control over many. why does everything come installed with windows? I would say the ones creating their own OS are Microsoft. Windows is the different one. And it is a design choice. Prety much everything else si some form of unix derivative. That includes Apple OSX. I do not think It is "reasonable" to say that at any point microsoft is more open than google.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[GameboyRMH]

You look a lot like a shill right now, brand new user with two wildly pro-MS comments.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[nschubach]

Maybe Slashdot needs to make an update to the posting algorithm:
You may not respond directly to a story unless your karma is excellent. You can respond to other posts, but never to a story.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[dehole]

Google's implementation of the Android API's are not a clean room implementation, they actually referenced JAVA's API's while creating it. But if API's are copyrightable... then we have problems.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

They really didn't have Microsoft by the balls in that case as they lost all of their initial claims and the antitrust case was pretty much dropped. I think Microsoft just wanted it to go away and they ended up finding someone who would be fine with shipping Microsoft products. B&N never cared about Android, they just wanted so sell devices and compete with Amazon in e-books, and Microsoft just wants someone to sell their software so that they can still feel relevant.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

In this case, though, it's not that an MS employee left MS and found a new job elsewhere. He pretty much packed up his desk at MS one Friday and unpacked it at Nokia the following Monday. Nokia is now Microsoft's bitch, that's the complete reason why Nokia ran to embrace WP7 long before anyone had even seen it running. If you insist otherwise, you're the one who needs to look around.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Jeng]

For that account, if you look back at any google story he posts the very first post, before anyone else is able to even comment, but he uses a different account each time, sometimes with names that have to do with the issue in question.

He used to post under his own account, but I can't remember it offhand.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[O('_')O_Bush]

In what world do you live in that publishing proprietary information on the internet doesn't get you fired? Google isn't in the habit of firing employees on a whim, so while might have thought he had approval, he clearly didn't from the people that mattered.

As for M$'s "research", most of it involes solving problems they created, or trying to clone Google's technologies. This is largely why you don't see any innovation coming out of their R&D, just Microsoft branded rehashes of existing and better things.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[RaceProUK]

Clean-room in this case means without using any code from Oracle's Java implementation.

It's a bit like how Mono relates to .NET - the surface looks the same, but that's where the similarity/sharing ends.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I didn't bother looking if he was the same guy, but if it's that Techsomething retard I get who you mean. Mods seemed to do the job..

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Paradigma11]

In what world do you live in that publishing proprietary information on the internet doesn't get you fired? Google isn't in the habit of firing employees on a whim, so while might have thought he had approval, he clearly didn't from the people that mattered.

As for M$'s "research", most of it involes solving problems they created, or trying to clone Google's technologies. This is largely why you don't see any innovation coming out of their R&D, just Microsoft branded rehashes of existing and better things.

You got to be kidding me: http://research.microsoft.com/apps/dp/areas.aspx

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

I would never use MeeGo or WP7. MeeGo is just not developed enough and WP7 is from a company that violates antitrust on a daily basis (and has been convicted). Why would anyone consider either of those?

Because they don't care about the shiny more than about having principles. Isn't that obvious enough?

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Worth noting that Google had nothing to do with this, Motorola was in this legal dispute long before they were acquired.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Works for me!

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[TheRaven64]

So then we get shills posting off-topic replies to the first post. It doesn't really solve much.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anyone consider either of those?
 
Friggin A, man! Why would anyone use a product from a company that violates antitrust? But I'll wink at the concept of using products made in China where a recent critic of the state's wife was threatened with being beaten to death if the critic didn't return to face his punishment by the Peoples Republic of Corruption.
 
I love how people keep stuff in perspective around here. If being a violator of anti-trust is enough to get you to boycott than having the spouse of someone who was daring enough to (gasp!) open his mouth about the state should surely bring about a boycott in your mind. If you're going to act like you're taking the high road here I suggest that you start by boycotting China and that machine in front of you. Have a nice day.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[geekoid]

"and they have made some remarkable things. "
such as...?

"Google has never really done any R&D of their own. "
Lie.
MS spends about 13% of it's revenue in RnD, Google about 12.5 % 8 billion and 3 billion.
Google also has a ton more to show for it.

"Everything else is bought in"
That's you argument for MS? Word, excel, Dos, Access, and most of their software was originally brought in.
That's a stupid complaint.

I lie how it went from book to research paper?
Paul Adams is a hypocrite, and a guy who gto famous talking about what everyone else was talking about at the time.
So I wouldn't be too quick to jump on just one side of of the issue if I where you.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[geekoid]

So? IT's a list of things. What has come to fruition? Yes, RnD is RnD and much of it won't come to fruition. But when you spend twice as much as the next guy, but hardly release anything new you go to kind of wonder what's going on there? I suspect the person in charge of RnD doesn't know how to run RnD.

How many robotic cars has MS on the road? There portable media device was how successful? The Gaming console has what level of errors? Their table was how successful?

With the money MS is putting into RnD they should be changing the world, instead they are running around like a bunch of clowns' Which is a shame.
There was a time I wanted to do RnD for MS, but the people I met, and the culture regarding RnD is not one striving for success.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[geekoid]

True, but you need to ,look at what happened. IN this case it's pretty obvious. He completely changed nokia direction to favor MS, and it outrages a lot of people.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at SLASHDOT's history.

Looks like it's owned by a company with financial ties to Linux. Thus, Slashdot as a whole can't be trusted.

I mean, who would take serious a website that posts images of the world's biggest philanthropist as some sort of evil Borg?

The Borg aren't evil, they just want to assimilate everyone else.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[nschubach]

Eh, it does sort of solve the anonymous first posters and these shill accounts. They can be modded off-topic pretty easily and the experienced users would have a way to steer the conversations a bit more than relying on the first troll.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[JimCanuck]

Clean room software engineering is supposed to be only knowing the inputs and outputs of the piece of software your trying to implement, without any inside knowledge of the source code.

This is how companies like Award, Phoenix and Compaq got away with cloning the IBM BIOS on the original IBM PC's as they used programmers and engineers who had never seen a copy of the code itself, and instead only provided them with "Input Command X results in Y if condition Z is met" type of documentation.

Reading the code and then rewriting it to do the exact same thing has been a violation of software copyrights since the 1980's when many companies tried to do that to the IBM BIOS, the legality of doing what your implying in court cases has already been shown to be illegal for the last 3 decades or so.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[JamesTKirk]

You can also always create your own OS.

Apparently, you can't, since you will be sued to death by either Microsoft or Oracle. It looks like every feature needed for a useful OS is already patented by someone else.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[thetoadwarrior]

This started before Google was involved, retard.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Billly Gates]

And IBM lost.

Compaq was allowed to prevail. Clean room was the norm afterwards and made clones possible.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[JimCanuck]

IBM didn't go after Compaq after they knew Compaq built the BIOS in a clean room environment, but they did go after a few other companies that just tried to copy the BIOS right out of the technical manuals IBM provided about the IBM PC.

IBM's goal was never to limit clone building, far from it, they rather supported it, they just refused to allow others to use their source code. IBM needed to standardize the desktop market as quickly as possible, because of their issues with clients purchasing their mini-computers and mainframes and then trying to get some other brand desktop computer with little documentation, and even less standardization between the manufacturers to play nice with their big iron.

The documents showing nearly every technical aspect of the initial IBM PC and later series of computers were made available for less then it cost to buy the PC itself. The original IBM PC started at $3,000 and yet IBM sold the technical documents to anyone who asked for a copy for a mere $400 at the same time.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[RaceProUK]

Reading the code and then rewriting it to do the exact same thing

Is not what Google did - they only read the API, which I believe is a defined standard. Think WINE - implements the Win32 API without the devs ever seeing a single line of Win32 source.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm placing my bets on "both".

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Jeng]

They finally retired the borg icon.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[LeDopore]

How about no ACs, no super-new accounts (newest 2%?) and no non-excellent-karma accounts in the first 5 replies to a story? Then newbies wouldn't be forced into top-posting, but trolls still couldn't get in the first word.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[marcosdumay]

patent fees from Andriod makers are only .02% according to Ars Technica

You know, that phrase almost means something.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Rasperin]

Microsoft has been attacking Google from left and right over Android, (hugely) it's search, it's email, etc. They are a huge backer to many of the lawsuits that have come up against Google. However, I agree with you I expect Microsoft to up it's game against Google with this lawsuit.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[exomondo]

Is not what Google did - they only read the API

How do you know that? Nothing stops them reading the source.

Think WINE - implements the Win32 API without the devs ever seeing a single line of Win32 source.

The obvious difference is that Win32 is closed source, Java is not. So WINE developers could not have seen Win32 source where Google's developers most certainly could have seen Java source.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Anonymous Coward]

You are either delusional or a shill.

I suppose that means you can't actually refute his post then, same as dismissing a post by labeling the author as a 'fanboy'. Sure i can see his post is inaccurate but if you have to resort to 'delusional' and 'shill' in an attempt to show that then you just prove that you don't even know why you think it's inaccurate much less have an ability to articulate it.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[exomondo]

Just because they don't make the devices and products based on that R&D doesn't mean it's worthless, R&D divisions (and organizations) - in particular Universities or groups like Xerox PARC - very often develop technology and license it out to companies who are in a position to make use of it rather than implementing it themselves. I saw a thing recently where MS did some work with extremely low latency touchscreens, i don't expect them to go into touchscreen production now but i'd certainly like - and expect - to see that licensed out and used in products from panel manufacturers like Samsung. They make money to pay for the R&D and implementors make money selling products that use the technology.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[Kalriath]

Google has an Exchange ActiveSync license, so... um, yeah. As does Apple, actually.

Re:Google has lowered itself to patent proxy wars

[drkstr1]

Ahhhh, I was wondering what all these "first post" comments were about. I mean who has the time for that, and to what ends? Now I understand; It's a honey pot! Very crafty indeed. (no, I am not being sarcastic, and yes... I must be new here).

Litigate rather than Innovate

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice to see Apple yet again resorting to the courts to... What's that? It's not Apple using the courts to stifle competition? It's sweet-and-dear Motorola/Google? Oh... Awkward...

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[Galestar]

It's awkward that they are fighting back? Do you have any idea why Google started purchasing Motorola in the first place? So they can counter strike against MS and Apple. I for one cheer them on - maybe now that MS and Apple are under attack maybe they can come to some sort of compromise, get out of the courts and get back to building products.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[squiggleslash]

No, it's Motorola. Google hasn't bought Motorola yet, and there's no evidence they're either in favor of Motorola's actions or against them.

I know, you already knew that, I'm correcting you so that people who don't know who paid for your post know it.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[Anonymous Coward]

First, if you think that Google isn't involved in the big-picture decisions that Moto is making, even though the purchase hasn't been completed, then you're delusional. You don't commit to a $12 billion purchase without some degree of oversight.

Second, I love how the new method of disagreeing with someone on /. is to claim that the differing opinion was paid for. Here's a secret - I'm paid by nobody to post anything on the internet. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean my disagreement was bought.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh look, it's bonch.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[squiggleslash]

I didn't say the OP disagreed, I said they lied. There's a difference. They said, outright, that this was Google. It isn't. They know it isn't. You can pretend that you have personal evidence that Larry Page personally supports everything Motorola is doing, but that's not the same thing as arguing that Google is actually doing the suing.

And yes, it's fairly obvious from the amount of lying, and the type of lying, and the bizarre twisted negative articles that keep being submitted that suggest something innoculous or good is evil, that there are shills heavily attacking Slashdot at the moment. The types of posts can't be explained by mere fanboiism.

And yes, the nature of the lie above means it's likely to be a shill job.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[Anonymous Coward]

And yes, it's fairly obvious from the amount of lying, and the type of lying, and the bizarre twisted negative articles that keep being submitted that suggest something innoculous or good is evil, that there are shills heavily attacking Slashdot at the moment. The types of posts can't be explained by mere fanboiism.

I think that you are creating a conspiracy theory where the average intelligence of slashdot users is a sufficient explanation.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[Jeng]

No it is pretty obvious that /. is getting astroturfed.

Anytime that you see a first post with the same time stamp as the story it is a shill. The same exact shill, he seems to have a friend on the inside or something.

Re:Litigate rather than Innovate

[drkstr1]

No it is pretty obvious that /. is getting astroturfed.

Anytime that you see a first post with the same time stamp as the story it is a shill. The same exact shill, he seems to have a friend on the inside or something.

I didn't want to believe it at first, but this man speaks the truth. There seems to be a lot of shilling going on right now. I don't know if it's always been this way, or if this is a new phenomena, but it's starting to become very apparent and easy to spot. I read differing opinions here all the time, and don't think anything about it, but a shill comment stands out like a blink tag at 4 in the morning. It is just so blatantly obvious that I'm offended at the implication; I am to stupid to know the difference.

Just make sure you don't call one of them out, or you will get modded all to hell (although it may of had to do with the VS bashing I threw on top for comedic effect... meh).

Not really.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

In a surprising move

I don't see what's so surprising about it.
Google has proven quite a few times as of late it's just as bad as every other company.
So why wouldn't they pull a move often used by every other bad company?

Re:Not really.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure if Google(Motorola) unilaterally disarms MS and Apple would retreat from their lawsuits/demand for trivialities from Android phone manufacturers.

I think everyone on Slashdot agrees that the end game should be patent reform. If that's not achievable, detente. But the problem with this foolishness is that the only way to defend your company from it is more foolish lawsuits.

Re:Not really.

[darkmeridian]

What are you talking about? You do believe in self-defense, right? Microsoft has been running around suing Android manufacturers for patent infringementâ"that's why MS paid $300 million to BN for a share of the Nook business: to settle the lawsuit. Google has to stop Microsoft from hindering the development of Android so why not fight fire with fire?

Re:Not really.

[jkrise]

So why wouldn't they pull a move often used by every other bad company?

The bad company here is Microsoft, making billions on Android, an OS which it did zilch to build. So Google is hitting back in self defense. Don't get our panties in a twist, yet.

Re:Not really.

[ArhcAngel]

Microsoft has been threatening to sue hardware OEMs that sell devices loaded with Android despite the fact Google/Linus own the licenses of the software Microsoft is alleging infringe on their IP. If Motorola/Google can get Microsoft into a cross-licensing deal it would indemnify anyone using Android and Microsoft couldn't nickel and dime each and every OEM. I'd say it was to be expected.

What would you do if a bully was scaring and shaking down all of your customers?

Re:Not really.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I'd kick him out of my store, that doesn't mean I'd go to his store and do the same.

Re:Not really.

[squiggleslash]

For the love of...

GOOGLE. DOES. NOT. OWN. MOTOROLA. YET.

it even implies it in the summary. WTH?

Re:Not really.

[StormReaver]

So why wouldn't they pull a move often used by every other bad company?

Has everyone on this thread gone brain dead? Microsoft sued Motorola for patent infringement, so Motorola sued back. Microsoft lost, as it should, as it is the company who always chooses to litigate rather than innovate.

Microsoft has no one to blame but themselves.

Re:Not really.

[sjames]

They aren't shaking down MS customers. They had the decency to go directly to MS.

Re:Not really.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I did not understand that it was a counter-suit (so thank you for that), but I never once stated that Microsoft was in the right either.
Seems most comments here misinterpreted my comment as saying such.

Re:Not really.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlikely, depending on what it costs to just license these patents from Motorola, they may just do that without cross-licensing, if it costs less than what they're making off of Android. Strategically, it makes sense to do this and see who else Motorola/Google sue over these h.264 patents.

Google is after all, the only major browser vendor trying to push WebM over h.264, aren't they? Think of how that looks. Think of how it looks that MS has their Android patents under RAND and has been only suing vendors that have squarely refused to negotiate a license, whereas Motorola is outright counter-suing. Also, think of this next time someone mentions MS. Android patents "so flimsy they won't reveal" - if they were that flimsy, you would think Motorola would seek to invalidate them in place of counter-suing.

Keep this in mind when anyone mentions how h'264 is bad because it's patent encumbered, will you remind them that the "good guys" are the only ones suing anyone over it? Or will you keep up with the double standard that it's okay as long as it benefits Linux/hurts Microsoft?

For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Billly Gates]

All I have to say is I told you so.

Like Motorolla would be happy letting you download and use a HTML 5 browser for free. Obviously you simply can't.

With this and the potential ruling that merely syntax is copyrightable in the Oracle VS Google case 2 things will happen. Either people will see how rediculious patents and copyright are and change. Or the bribery will continue and no one but big pockets will compete. Hell, MS has big pockets and still are getting nailed. This is getting nuts.

It seems China and India are the only ones not crazy here.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

God forbid people start using that as an excuse to say that Google was really trying to show that the industry needs to be changed and they were "doing it for the people"

People need to accept Google are just as corrupt as other companies and will use patents to their advantage.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[cpu6502]

I tried playing WebM on my iPod, generic Bestbuy player, radio, CD/MP3 player, and TV.
Didn't work. Didn't work. Didn't work.
Didn't work. Didn't work.

I would no sooner adopt WebM than I would throw-away my VHS VCR and go buy Betamax?!?!? As for this ruling the REAL surprise is that a U.S. judge has the power to overrule and "restrain" a German court's decision. When did Germany become a protectorate of the U.S.? Is this some leftover from the war? (In the same fashion the U.S. forbade Japan to have any army beyond a "defensive force".)

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Eirenarch]

The US judge cannot overturn the German judge decision. He can however fine Motorola in the US if they enforced the ban in Germany. This is exactly what he needed to do to prevent Motorola's strategy of "get products banned in a big market and force them to settle for the whole world despite the fact that we would ultimately lose if they wait it out"

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried playing WebM on my iPod, generic Bestbuy player, radio, CD/MP3 player, and TV.
Didn't work. Didn't work. Didn't work.
Didn't work. Didn't work.

Why, thank you! Your snarky whining does, indeed, go a long way to show the GP's point that big-media and big-money entrenchment is a major part of the problem!

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

I would no sooner adopt WebM than I would throw-away my VHS VCR and go buy Betamax?!?!?

The 80's called - they want their analogy back.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Canazza]

I don't think it's corruption. Peer pressure perhaps. Escalation of arms certainly. Corruption implies something more sinister than simple incompetence.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried playing WebM on my iPod, generic Bestbuy player, radio, CD/MP3 player, and TV.

Most of those devices weren't designed to play html5 video. So, while we can agree that h.264 is more widespread it's not such a big deal if we start using something else for the web.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[tlhIngan]

Like Motorolla would be happy letting you download and use a HTML 5 browser for free. Obviously you simply can't.

Well, you can if you use the built-in licensed decoder.

An interesting question is the details - h.264, unlike cellphones, is licensed under a patent pool. That you, you can either do like we have in cellphones and license all the patents one-by-one (have fun!), or decide to license the whole group of them together in one fell swoop. This is done because the MPEG standards group created the MPEG licensing authority (MPEG-LA) that basically has the authority to license the patents used all at once.

Pay that license fee, and you're done. If Motorola's patents are in that patent pool, then Microsoft would already HAVE a license since they're paying for the other h.264 patents anyhow.

So something is not quite adding up here. They're effectively FRAND patents (since anyone can come up to the MPEG-LA, say they want to license to do X with h.264, pay the fee (on the fee schedule) and walk away), so...

As for WebM - it never had a chance. It was announced and standardized only a couple of years ago. Thing is, it takes YEARS for it to make it in hardware. The first GPUs with WebM support would probably hit late 2012-2013, with expected mass shipments by holiday 2013 (i.e., when you and I can buy stuff with it in).

Yes, it takes that long - hell, I was playing with h.264 back in 2003 (when DivX reigned supreme).

So something is not quite right here - if Microsoft paid their h.264 licensing fees, the Motorola patents should automatically be included as part of the deal.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried playing WebM on my iPod, generic Bestbuy player, radio, CD/MP3 player, and TV.

Impressive. Are you a NetBSD user by any chance? You didn't list toaster, so I assume WebM does work on your toaster.

Re:For all those who bashed webM/Mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that Google doesn't yet own Motorola and is legally prohibited from influencing them until they do, you're basically full of shit.

Software patents

[Anonymous Coward]

As funny as this is, It really is just a further argument for why Software patents should be eradicated once and for all.

Re:Software patents

[AwaxSlashdot]

Those are not software patents. WiFi and H.264 are not software.

Re:Software patents

[JesseMcDonald]

Despite having "software" in the name, "software patents" include all patents on algorithms and protocols—anything which can be implemented in software—of which WiFi and H.264 are obvious examples. So long as the patent would cover a software implementation, it's a software patent; the fact that any software can also be implemented in fixed hardware is irrelevant.

If the patent only covers a particular was of implementing the algorithm or protocol in hardware, and thus would not apply to any software implementation, then it's still an unjust act of aggression, and a net loss to society, but it's not a software patent.

Re:Software patents

[Anonymous Coward]

More reason to throw away the existing Intellectual property system, and widdle it down to actual inventions and physical media.

See the entire reason the US is rapidly losing the ability to generate jobs in the country is because they can keep the HQ in the country and outsource everything to wherever it's cheapest to produce because intellectual property without tangibility allows them to do this.

We're about to see this come full circle, where "3D copiers" will allow end-users to copy anything that can be made out of ABS plastic, which is the vast majority of plastic parts, toys, lego, adult "toys," etc. Initial piracy will be of low quality, but look at how piracy of everything else starts, initially low quality, but the demand for better quality copies will rapidly innovate the process.

Where we stand right now, is that IP wars are fought, and money set on fire fighting Patent, Trademark and Copyright battles that have already been lost. From a purely software perspective, anyone can copy anything from digital masters, so instead of trying to plug the cracks in the dam with your finger, just let it go and control the distribution from the digital level to begin with.

WiFi is primarily a hardware "invention", H.264 is primarily software that can be accelerated with dedicated parallel computing hardware (like GPU's,) It's very easy to copy the software aspect, so we should not be applying patents to software, as they are not inventions, they have no tangibility, which also means that two different people can come up with totally different implementations of software that produces identical results. Physical products that are man-made (think of someone widdling a spoon using a knife) don't do this. If you tell two people to come up with a "spoon" using your "invention" spoon as reference, they'll still come up with slightly different spoon's, be it different materials, or textures. This is because the invention "patent" should only be instructions on how to copy the invented function, not a monopoly on all things that have identical functions.

We see this with drug patents, which is where the patent system completely falls apart. Companies patent variations on their own drugs, even if the newer drugs are less effective, and hold back research until they patent it because of the financial incentive of a monopoly on that drug. If the patent system didn't exist, they'd only have the trademark and copyright system to fall back on, which would be the color and shape of the drug in pill form.

If anything the existing patent, copyright and trademark system should be thrown away in favor of IP-by-classification system, where IP involved in life-saving (drugs, machines, etc) is automatically public domain, but production is by (government or other authority for QA) licence only, similar to how nobody can produce their own home nuclear reactor. IP involved in wealth generation (anything having to do with banking or stock markets) is licensed by the banking rules authority (SEC, FDIC.) Some other classifications could exist, for food, weapons, and culture. Where "culture" is everything currently covered by copyright and trademark law in regards to things like music, movies, video games. Culture rights are purely "by creator until death, or unless no tangible copy is available", so if someone sings a song, they own the rights to it, but should they never release a tangible copy (eg a CD), then it's fair game for someone who recorded the live show on their cell phone to put it on bittorrent. Video games are a better example however, as Video games are only in print for about 7 years, and then are no longer produced for the current computer or video game console. When the physical cd/dvd's etc are no longer in print, then it's fair game to make copies of them. Likewise with content produced overseas but not licensed for domestic markets, as long as it's in print somewhere AND available to be shipped to you, it's not fair game to copy it. No more region locking otherwise it makes it fair game to copy it.

This has been your crazy ramble to waste time of the day.

Re:Software patents

[idontgno]

Please. Go ahead and implement those in pure hardware. I'll wait.

(This should be good. I've never seen schematics that big.)

How ironic,

[SuricouRaven]

The open source community is highly reluctant to use h264 because they are concerned that Microsoft (Among others, but princibly their historical enemy Microsoft) would do something like that. Now Microsoft is on the receiving end.

So I thought H264 was better

[Anonymous Coward]

So I thought H264 was better because you were secure from being sued for patent infringement, unlike WebM?

Hello Mr. Troll

[Jeng]

Ok, so you submit stories under one name, create a new account, and then post the very second the article is submitted.

We get it, you have an agenda you want to promote, but you don't want to do it under your own account because it is already known you are just a shill and this makes it harder to ignore you.

I just have one request, fuck off.

Slashdot Editors, if you continue to be apparently complicit in helping him push his agenda then people will quit having discussions on this site. It will badly damage /.'s reputation and in the end your bottom line.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

It will badly damage /.'s reputation and in the end your bottom line.

You should try threatening to leave - that would be much more effective.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Jeng]

ROFL, yea, that is very effective.

The AC's dramatically declaring that they are leaving are probably the funniest.

The thing is, if this continues, it's not about me leaving, it's about this site becoming irrelevant if they continue to support shills.

This site is only as good as it's community and the community hates this asshole. It's part of why he no longer posts using is main account.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

You're the reason I'm bailing this fucking joint!

Fuck! I hate slashdot any more. Everyone bitching and bitching and bitching about this and that. And then someone calls someone for being a troll, and if said troll is pro-(MS/Apple/Google/anything really) while anti-(insert competition), then assholes like you come in and bitch about the person calling troll on them.

Fuck this. Goodbye slashdot. Goodbye all of you stupid shits. I'M NEVER COMING HERE AGAIN!!!!!

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Jeng]

I don't give a shit about the position, it's the tactic that pisses me off.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Rockmelody]

So would you rather have tons of "first post!1!" messages as first, or intelligent, reasonable and investigated messages as first posts? Because I would rather read the later ones, those including from Tech* guy.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Jeng]

If it wasn't full of shit it would be a great first post.

Posting obviously biased bullshit does not counter obviously biased bullshit, it just makes more of it that we have to filter to find the nuggets of wisdom.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

I changed my mind, I'm back. For good.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Because I would rather read the later ones, those including from Tech* guy.

I'm sure, given that based on your posting history you apparently registered specifically to comment in this thread. Just like "indiegamer".

Seriously? Your suckitude has now reached the point where you need to spawn several new sockpuppets for a single thread? I wonder how long it'll take you until you only get one post out of each of them.

This calls of an addition to the slashdot UI, to list when people first registered and/or how many posts they have in the post header. Or maybe we could go a bit further and also allow people to assign score penalties for posts by very new users. Doesn't have to be a large limit, it's not like you even seem to make it beyond 2 per account anymore.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Jeng]

This calls of an addition to the slashdot UI, to list when people first registered and/or how many posts they have in the post header. Or maybe we could go a bit further and also allow people to assign score penalties for posts by very new users. Doesn't have to be a large limit, it's not like you even seem to make it beyond 2 per account anymore.

A simple way of implementing what you are saying would be to make karma public, but then people would get even more butt hurt about getting modded down.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[TheP4st]

Where oh where I are my mod points when I need them for the by far funniest AC reply I have seen in quite some time, possibly ever.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, fuck it, I'm going to go again.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, I think I'm back for realies this time.

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you AC troll! I said I'm gone!

Re:Hello Mr. Troll

[bryan1945]

Umm, wow, that was somewhere between bizarre and awesome(?)(!)(.)

Nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

The ruling is suspended as of now because of a restraining order

It would probably be wise for Motorola not to seek enforcement of the injunction, given the US ruling. However that isn't the same as the ruling being suspended.

Doesn't mean jack

[Opportunist]

Seriously, ponder for a moment what would happen if Nebraska decided to ban MS products. Well? Right. People from Nebraska wanting MS products will buy them outside Nebraska.

It's not much different for the EU.

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[Anonymous Coward]

Ha ha, good one! We all know that there are no computers in Nebraska. Nice try.

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[Anonymous Coward]

What am I posting this on, then? (Also, why is your post +2 Insightful instead of +2 funny? C'mon now.)

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[Anonymous Coward]

What am I posting this on, then?

Slashdot?

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[kramerd]

Nebraska has about 2 M people. The EU has close to 750M people. Microsoft might notice if 750 M people started getting windows from another country.

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[drinkypoo]

It's pretty massively different, because having to go outside one's state is a nuisance. Having to go outside one's country is an even bigger one. There are all kinds of logistic reasons why that's a PITA. Additional taxes in the EU, for one.

Re:Doesn't mean jack

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? If having to buy an XBox meant I needed to leave the country, even if it was a teeny tiny country the size of Montana, that'd be a very strong motivation to buy a PS3.

Still wouldn't bother getting a Wii though.

Motorola is not Google yet

[Anonymous Coward]

The Motorola / Google deal hasn't closed yet, until it does Google can not control legally Motorola. Let Google take control of the company before you start blaming them. Motorola is struggling tech company with a lot IP so it really shouldn't surprise anyone that it turned to IP litigation just like so many other tech companies on their way out. Until Google takes over this is Motorola hedging in case the merger falls through.

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[AwaxSlashdot]

However, in the current acquisition process, Motorola can take no action without the explicit consent of Google, especially for legal actions (suing or granting licenses) because those actions would be binding to Google after the acquisition.

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[FreeUser]

However, in the current acquisition process, Motorola can take no action without the explicit consent of Google, especially for legal actions (suing or granting licenses) because those actions would be binding to Google after the acquisition.

True, but didn't Motorola start this litagion before the merger was agreed? In which case, they wouldn't have needed, or sought, Google's approval.

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[Anonymous Coward]

dur herpa derp

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[jo_ham]

Funny that when it suits /., things like this are pointed out, yet when it's reversed (eg, when MS bought Skype and Skype did something "anti-Linux" before MS took control) then it is all attributed to whatever evil empire is currently en vogue. It was totally fine then - in fact, it was aggressively pointed out, and promoted as "typical" MS tactics and that thinking that MS was *not* involved was "naive". But this time it's different, right?

For the record, you're probably right - this was Motorola's attempt to abuse a couple of FRAND patents to hit back at Microsoft's litigation against them. Probably annoying and awkward for Google more than anything.

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[Anonymous Coward]

"For the record, you're probably right - this was Motorola's attempt to abuse a couple of FRAND patents to hit back at Microsoft's litigation against them. Probably annoying and awkward for Google more than anything."

On a similar note to your post, why is it when discussion of the likes of Apple and Microsoft comes up people view the patents as legitimate to sue over, but when anyone else does it the FRAND cry comes out.

Half the patents Motorola are suing over aren't even FRAND - Florian Mueller has tried to spread his usual FUD by saying in the original BBC article "FRAND like patents" to try and give the false implication they are somehow FRAND when they are not.

There's no FRAND abuse here for the most part, no more so than Microsoft and Apple's patent suits, but this goes back to something I've said all along, I frankly believe the whole FRAND thing is meaningless anyway. Things become equally as important that aren't FRAND as things that are, and it creates disparity between patents where frankly there should be equality. The real solution is to just do away with FRAND to level the playing field or make all software and related patents inherently FRAND, or of course, just do away with software patents altogether.

Re:Motorola is not Google yet

[jo_ham]

That assumes you think I believe Apple's and Microsoft's lawsuits are legitimate.

I believe Apple had a case with the design of the Samsung Galaxy, but everything else they have put out has been spurious (slide to unlock, etc), and even then I think they expanded the scope of the Samsung suit too far.

I assume that you agree that "at least half" of Moto's suits *do* involve FRAND patents then (this being one of them) and that it is absolutely the wrong thing to do and winning it is bad, regardless of who the target is (Apple, MS, Sony, Google, $Other) etc?

Whaaaaaaa

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft gets $15 per Android handset for patents so weak they won't reveal in public. So if Google sticks it to Microsoft the world is a better place and good on them.

To use Microsoft's own phrase "Whaaaaaaaa".

Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[JustAnotherIdiot]

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see Microsoft get a taste of their own medicine.
I just fail to see why anything in this news is "surprising"

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[blind biker]

Microsoft gets $15 per Android handset for patents so weak they won't reveal in public. So if Google sticks it to Microsoft the world is a better place and good on them.

To use Microsoft's own phrase "Whaaaaaaaa".

Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Quoted for fucking emphasis and violent agreement.
Microsoft, may this be a big "fuck you" from all the Android licensees.

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[houghi]

No, the world is NOT a better place. Unless you are either Google or Microsoft, that is.

The patent system is still broken.

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the fight that is surprising, it's the verdict that is surprising.

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[Anonymous Coward]

What bothers me, that here, NL in Europe, where I am, those software patterns aren't even valid. I would love to buy a Samsung Android phone but am not feeling to happy about paying Samsung-Microsoft 15USD per handset. Especially when those cheaper phones are only 100 USD (aboutish) to begin with!

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[Anonymous Coward]

The world is not a better place unless you are a lawyer working at Google, Microsoft, Apple, Oracle etc. I kind of doubt the companies themselves actually benefit from these legal charades.

Re:Whaaaaaaa

[mattack2]

Won't reveal in public? Patents are public.

oh, if only....

[gbjbaanb]

oh, if only there was a patent-free video codec available for general use instead of that horrible h.264 system that evil companies like Microsoft want to force other companies like Google to use.

oh, wait... umm. Well, at least this gives Google some ammunition to prove that they should convert all of Youtube to WebM before they get sued by, umm. errm... oh lord, it's so difficult to know which way's up in the world of IT now!

Re:oh, if only....

[Anonymous Coward]

WebM is not more patent-free than H.264. I'm sure someone, somewhere, can claim that at least some parts of WebM are patented. Just because Google claims WebM is parent-free doesn't make it so.

Re:oh, if only....

[Anonymous Coward]

You're wrong and I will provide as much proof and sources as you: ...

Texas Courts?

[thomasw_lrd]

Is Germany the Texas courts of Europe? Seems like every other day, one tech item or another is being banned in Germany. Soon, the 3rd Reich will rise again, just so they can play with their tech toys.
I welcome the cleansing of all lawyers from the earth.

Retalliation

[Bert64]

Aren't Motorola acting in self defense? As i understand it, MS has been trying to shake down android handset manufacturers for a while and motorola are one of the few that refused to give in to their demands.

Re:Retalliation

[Eirenarch]

They are but their position is weak (using FRAND patents)

Re:Retalliation

[jo_ham]

Yes, definitely, but they have sunk to the position of using FRAND patents to do the job, which is somewhat questionable.

If nothing else it will ensure that any standards body in the future will think long and hard before accepting any new submissions from them on future standards, so it will hurt them (and anyone owned by them) in the long run for a bit of short term gain. The point of the FRAND pool was to prevent exactly this sort of thing from happening, but it does depend on the various submitting members following the contractual obligations they agreed to. This very situation is one of the reasons the Mozilla foundation was so stubborn about H.264 adoption.

Re:Retalliation

[aaaaaaargh!]

Perhaps Motorola is acting in self-defense, but that's not the point. The problem is that these companies are all setting precedents and creating a status quo that will make software development illegal in the long run -- if this patent madness continues. Yes, the big companies may have MAD and manage to settle most issues out of court, but in the course of it the absurd patent situation will become more and more accepted by courts and legislators up to the point that no small software company will be able to produce anything remotely legal. In theory, this is already the case only large patent pools do not sue yet very often, but this will change after the global monopolies have come to an agreement.

What I want to know is...

[jonwil]

how a court ruling in a US court has any bearing on the German legal system and why the German legal system (and whichever authorities are responsible for enforcing the decision by the German judge) has to even care what the US court said and cant just say "screw the US, we are going to enforce the ban starting right now"

Or is there some sort of international treaty that applies here?

Re:What I want to know is...

[Sc4Freak]

The German courts and legal system doesn't listen to the US judge. That much is patently obvious, because the US has no jurisdiction in Germany.

But Motorola is a US company who does business in the US. Hence it must abide by US laws and rulings. The US judge said to Motorola, "even if you win the case in Germany, you must not follow through on the ban on MS products in Germany until I have made my ruling here." That doesn't infringe on German jurisdiction.

Re:What I want to know is...

[quacking duck]

Since Motorola does business in Germany also, what's to prevent the German court from imposing (stiffer) penalties on Motorola Germany for NOT abiding by the German ruling? Seems two can play that legal game, and then Motorola is in a Catch 22.

Re:What I want to know is...

[Anonymous Coward]

None is going to go against U.S. government unless they are terrorists, and that includes Germany.

Re:What I want to know is...

[alexo]

Since Motorola does business in Germany also, what's to prevent the German court from imposing (stiffer) penalties on Motorola Germany for NOT abiding by the German ruling?

The German ruling allows Motorola to enforce a ban, it does not require them to do so.

I need a guide

[goombah99]

SO many of these patent claims seem to be the same ones. Didn't motorola just get slapped down for trying to impose restrictions on FRAND granted H264 patents in some other case? it's all so confusing. I need a chart.

Who wins here?

[apcullen]

I'm thinking that, in the end, nobody really comes out ahead in these tit-for-tat lawsuits.

Re:Who wins here?

[theswimmingbird]

nobody really comes out ahead in these tit-for-tat lawsuits.

Except for The Pirate Bay.

Re:Who wins here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gonna download meself an Xbox using a Torrent, yes I am...

Re:Who wins here?

[rachit]

Er, the lawyers?

Re:Who wins here?

[apcullen]

I stand corrected.

Microsoft double standard for you and them

[Anonymous Coward]

So... I can't torrent a copy of Microsoft Publisher 2010, but they can use someone else's copyrighted/patented technology??

And in the end...

[RabidReindeer]

Everyone will have prevented everyone else from selling anything.

And we'll all end up living in caves eating rats.

And paying Monsanto for the privilege thanks to the rats having mutated from ingesting Monsanto-proprietary DNA.

Re:And in the end...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone will have prevented everyone else from selling anything.

And we'll all end up living in caves eating rats.

And paying Monsanto for the privilege thanks to the rats having mutated from ingesting Monsanto-proprietary DNA.

When it reaches that stage, I'm eating lawyers! They're like rats, except Monsanto won't touch them.

German Court = Kid US Court = Parent

[Anonymous Coward]

The ruling itself is not even the craziest about this story.

The CRAZY thing is that some US court has a veto on what a German court can do about things happening in Germany.

What the F??

I wonder what the German Pirate Party has to say about this.

Re:German Court = Kid US Court = Parent

[Anonymous Coward]

Kid: 'Mooom, he's doing something I don't like!!!'
Mom: 'Just ignore him'
Kid: 'Daaaad, He's doing something I don't like!!!'
Dad: 'Tell him to stop it or I will come in and stop it'

Kid=Motorola
Mom=US Court
Dad=German Court

Software patents in Germany?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft must license MPEG patents in Germany? EU? What about the famous "software is not patentable in EU" thing?

Another example of fine english on /.

[AbRASiON]

I'd ban the "Motorola Xbox" too! It doesn't sound like a legitimate product to me,........

Obligatory

[matthew_t_west]

"NO MICROSOFT FOR YOU!" -- The Software Nazi

M

PS - I tried all caps, but I got a filter error telling me, "Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING" What if that's what I want to do? Apparently adding this post script took care of my yelling issue.

They will never give Motorola priority

[DrYak]

Android vendors were worried google would give preference to Motorola, not "google's plans". As of so far, google is simply carrying on doing what it does day to day and not giving Motorola priority.

Google will very likely never give preference to Motorola, not because they are pure hearted and follow their "Do no evil" motto, but more because this isn't their primarry market.

Google at its core is a *search company*. A company whose skill is matching keywords to the best suited results, and it monetises these skills by turning them the other way around: by bringing the most relevant and likely to be useful ad to the users. They profit from ads.

Anything else they develop is ancillary, and from a financial point of view, only makes sense as a way to bring ads to more end-users. That's why they don't have any problems financing a 3rd party browser (Mozilla Firefox) even being their top source of financing, while exactly at the same time they develop their own browser (Chrome/Chromium). There's no conflict of interests in there, as their interests aren't in selling browsers (or bundling them with other software they sell). They just need as many users as possible surfing to google's online services and thus exposed to google's ads. As long as said users are provided with modern browsers following up to date web standards, it's okay for google, no matter who wrote said browser.

Same with handsets. They are not in the market of selling phone embed OS, the OS it self is available as open source, even under a permissive license (although they can marginally earn some money through the license they sell for bundling their closed source applications). They are not in the market of selling actual handsets neither (although they could get some margins once they finish acquiring motorola). What they need it to have people buying apps from the android marketplace, and people surfing to their on-line services. That's where they will be getting their money from. If the phone was made by them or not is irrelevant.

The only advantage of making their own OS is that they are sure to have a nice platform with a nice up-to-date browser to get the users to google's source of revenue. The only advantage of having their own manufacturer, is that they can release "perfect handsets", hardware that is optimised to make most of the available OS and vice verse (unlike some of the cheap chinese cloners who basically slapped the opensoruce edition on some dead cheap underpowered piece of crap).

But they don't have any argument to disadvantage concurrent handset makers. Making other hardware manufacturer "second class citizens" would divert revenue from google.

Re:They will never give Motorola priority

[poetmatt]

I agree, 100%. It's just not important to them. I didn't mean to tie it to the question of evil-ness or not, I was just trying to de-fud a fudster. Also having such a focus puts them into a *proper* focus for everything else. It's kind of a nice thing. It's like setting your priorities right from the start.

patent proxy wars vs divorse wars

[Anonymous Coward]

It is in both companies best interests not to go sue crazy. It is the same thing I did with my exwife when I could have got a lawyer, but so would she and then shit would hit the fans for both of us and both of us would loose.

Yes, but you and your wife acted in your own best interests, corporations don't. Remember, such issues must go to "legal" who has a vested interest in empire building and increasing their importance. Had you consulted a lawyer to ask if you should get a lawyer, what do you think his answer would be?

The ruling is not suspended.

[aepervius]

Motorola has decided to not apply due to the ruling due to the restraining order in the US and potential retaliation from US courts. That is quite different, as there is no way in hell an US court can restrain the function of a german one.

If Google bought the h264 patents

[Hentes]

if Google has the h264 patents couldn't they just offer it free of charge instead of developing their own version?

Re:If Google bought the h264 patents

[shutdown -p now]

There are many patents that apply here. Moto only owns a few - just enough to make life difficult for anyone else (especially since, apparently, they're not part of the license pool?).

MPEG-LA

[__aazsst3756]

I'm confused. I thought the purpose for MPEG-LA was a cross licensing of all patents required for h.264 (with payment)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Standardization_committee_and_history