Nokia Faces Class-Action Suit Over Windows Phone Deal

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nokia Faces Class-Action Suit Over Windows Phone Deal

Posted by Soulskill on Friday May 4, 2012 @02:57AM from the barn-doors-and-horses dept.

nk497 writes "Nokia has been hit with a class-action suit, with the claimant accusing the company of making 'false and misleading' statements about the ability of its deal with Microsoft to revive the struggling mobile maker. 'The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants told investors that Nokia's conversion to a Windows platform would halt its deteriorating position in the smartphone market,' read a statement (PDF) from the law firm Robbins Geller Rudman and Dowd. 'It did not.'"

53 of 257 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Another ridiculous lawsuit by yog · 2012-05-04 02:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

It just proves that in America, you can sue anybody for anything.
Nokia's defense would obviously be that market conditions changed, they could not possibly know the future, and all business decisions are inherently risky.
Also, given that Microsoft invested hundreds of millions of dollars into Nokia, their decision to go with Windows phone OS can hardly be regarded as the riskiest of choices. When one of the world's largest corporations invests in you, you are not going to go out of business the next day, or the next year.
That said, I believe Nokia would be better off turning their engineering expertise to producing some Android phones, to take advantage of the enormous app market. They are capable of making a great phone, but their operating systems have been marginalized by the success of Apple and Android. So why not go with one of the winners?
Plus I can say from personal experience that their support for developers has been shaky, what with all but dropping support for Java, then releasing the N7 and N9, then dropping them in favor of Windows Mobile. What are they going to surprise us with next month? It's safer to stick to an established and relatively stable market such as Android or IOS.

--
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
1. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-04 03:08 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  It just proves that in America, you can sue anybody for anything.
  Uh...yeah? That's the way the system works. Anyone can bring an action against anyone else and the court must hear it.
  
  I could file paperwork with my local court saying you are a douche and that somehow harmed me. They would read through the documents and (probably pretty easily) come to the conclusion that I haven't made a case that you broke the law and/or harmed me and throw it out.
  
  Some cases aren't as clear-cut as my example and require a judge and jury to decide.
  
  Could you imagine if we used your model? You can't sue anybody for anything--only stuff I think is legit. That would put you in a fairly powerful position....something like 'dictator' or whatever.
2. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by poetmatt · 2012-05-04 03:10 · Score: 2
  
  I don't know about the legality, but a lot of people jumped ship when this deal was struck...I do recall many people had substantial disagreements with the deal in the first place.
3. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-05-04 03:10 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Eh, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.
  
  If you look at various SEC mandated, or voluntary, disclosures from publicly traded companies, you'll almost always see something like this example from Time Warner.
  
  Legally, distinguishing between statements of fact and 'forward looking statements' makes a difference. It's like the securities equivalent of the “These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.” tag you always see on 'dietary supplements'.
  
  So, if some optimist was given information that constituted a forward looking statement, with the usual boilerplate, about what Nokia hoped their strategy would do, they can go shove it. If Nokia outright claimed that this move would have a specific, definite effect, on their market position or stock price, Nokia may well have shoved their foot in their mouth, good and hard...
4. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-05-04 03:12 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Forward-looking statements have disclaimers. This guy is a moron. There was no 'lying' to this at all.
5. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by andydread · 2012-05-04 03:19 · Score: 2
  
  What the hell are you talking about? And Windows is not a commodity? You even get less differentiation of your product from others when you use Windows rather than Android. You have less room to be different from the next guy with Windows.
6. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by PickyH3D · 2012-05-04 03:24 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Wait, what? Nokia just released their first Windows Phones in November 2011, neither were released in the United States. At some point they released the Lumia 710 in the United States, and it sold pretty well, but it was on the smallest of the big carriers: T-Mobile. Now, Nokia has added the Lumia 900 to AT&T and it is supposedly selling pretty well (I live near a Microsoft Store, and I can honestly say that the store itself has been recently more popular than the Apple Store in the mall, but that mostly has to do with location within the mall; I have also seen a lot of people walking out with new Lumia 900 phones).
  Anyway, all of this is to say that you have no idea what you are talking about when you are talking about financial reporting. Two phones are not going to save a company, and at least two bad quarters were expected. Nokia is just now getting back into the swing of things, and people looking for instant success are both naive and represent what is wrong with investors in general these days.
  Otherwise, Motorola Mobility going with that "Android" platform is really proving to be a sinking ship, right? Because they've had two bad quarters too.
  Learn a thing or two about corporate financial reporting.
7. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-05-04 03:25 · Score: 2
  
  Because I actually read their entire statement including the huge disclaimer about forward-looking statements contained in it?
8. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-04 03:27 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Also, given that Microsoft invested hundreds of millions of dollars into Nokia, their decision to go with Windows phone OS can hardly be regarded as the riskiest of choices. When one of the world's largest corporations invests in you, you are not going to go out of business the next day, or the next year.
  Except that Nokia intentionally and dramatically increased this risk by killing MeeGo, which is a production quality OS which kicks the shit out of Android and Windows Phone 7.
  I believe it's highly likely that Elop is acting in bad faith. However, unless a high ranking Nokia exec leaks information, I don't think there will be any tangible evidence against him.
9. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Rhodri+Mawr · 2012-05-04 03:36 · Score: 2
  
  The difficulty with the N900 was that they introduced one phone. As an N900 user (still) I know that the N900 is not for everyone, and was targeted more at the tech-savvy user than your bog standard just-want-a-phone-that-works user. Not everyone wants a built in keyboard or a phone that large. In fact, one of the reasons I haven't changed phone is that it is so difficult to get a decent phone with a slide-out keyboard, similar the the N900. Suggestions welcomed...
  
  Nokia needed to produce several phones around a similar theme aimed at different users, or do what Apple did and produce one phone to a very high standard aimed at the average user, not at a niche market (80/20 rule). Doing what they did was narrow minded and poor business sense.
  
  Nokia's support for developers was, frankly, not an enjoyable experience. This is where being part of the Windows universe will be an advantage to Nokia as that will be Microsoft's responsibility, not their own.
10. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Sir_Sri · 2012-05-04 03:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It didn't.
  Nokia's entire argument in 1 word: Yet.
  Whether they are right or not who knows, but their plan to save the company with Windows phones is still in its early phases. Which is a commentary on their poor execution, but it's still a plan in motion. The guy filing the suit is either a moron, or is in trouble with his own investors and is trying to get himself press for looking like he's doing something.
11. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by UnknowingFool · 2012-05-04 03:49 · Score: 2
  
  At some point they released the Lumia 710 in the United States, and it sold pretty well, but it was on the smallest of the big carriers: T-Mobile.
  Determines by what you mean "pretty well". I think I read that Nokia sold 2M Lumias since December. 2M in the US over 2 quarters isn't exactly a lot and Lumias don't appear to be selling nearly as well elsewhere. Nokia sold roughly 300K Symbian in Q1 and between 1.5-2M in Q4. It doesn't look good for WP7 if it can't beat a platform that isn't being advertised and is being actively phased out.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
12. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-05-04 03:54 · Score: 2
  
  And why would Nokia choose a path where they were sure to fail? The guy filing the suit is a moron indeed. There's a reason it's called investing and not saving; there is a risk you lose all your money. He was free to sell his Nokia shares at the time. There was a chance that Windows Mobile would score big in the corporate world. It didn't.
  That's his point. He would have sold his shares if Nokia was forthright in telling investors what the real situation was. Corporations are liable for information and promises they tell investors. Whether or not Nokia was misleading or not will be for the courts to decide.
  What the courts will not be deciding is whether or not it was a good decision to go with Windows Mobile, only whether or not Nokia mislead the investors. These suits happen all the time.
13. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Dishevel · 2012-05-04 03:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If I was still a Nokia shareholder I would be stupid.
  
  --
  Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
14. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-04 04:04 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Hell, everyone on slashdot complaints how companies just want quick profit. Microsoft and Nokia are fresh air to that.
  ... Because they just want quick bancrupcy? There was some proverb about eggs and baskets, could somebody remind this guy? Because WP7 was rather sketchy basket, and Elop dumped all his eggs in there happily.
  P.S: For fuck's sake, stop being so obvious with your sockpuppets. Recycled talk points are recycled:
  
  Hell, everyone on slashdot complaints how companies just want quick profit. Microsoft and Nokia are fresh air to that.
  
  Most people tend to bitch how companies don't think long term but just want quick cash. Well, not Microsoft. -- InsightIn140Bytes
  
  People on slashdot always complain that companies aren't thinking long term but instead just try to get quick profits. -- TechNY
15. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by 21mhz · 2012-05-04 04:06 · Score: 2
  
  Except that Nokia intentionally and dramatically increased this risk by killing MeeGo, which is a production quality OS which kicks the shit out of Android and Windows Phone 7.
  MeeGo proper was never even released on any commercially available device. What N9 got is a Maemo version bastardized and rebranded as MeeGo. And as somebody who has actually used the N9 and the Lumia 800 back to back, I attest that the software in N9 is nowhere near the quality of Windows Phone 7.
  
  --
  My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
16. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by ArsonSmith · 2012-05-04 04:13 · Score: 2
  
  Or it's hedging their investment to make sure the CEO doesn't give himself giant bonuses as the ship is sinking and screwing the investors for everything he can.
  
  --
  Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
17. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Nursie · 2012-05-04 04:15 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This is the cancer that is killing slashdot....
  Not that I like borrowing phraseology from /b/, but it seems to be true. Half of slashdot these days is people yelling 'shill' at each other, and that's because people like those you mention are on here, being paid shills.
  Marketers, brand managers, social networking managers, image managers, whatever you want to call them, can and will insert themselves into every aspect of human communication, exploit it for their own short term gain, and ruin it.
  Bill Hicks came right out and told them to kill themselves. I would ask that first they look inside and ask themselves if being a professional liar is what they wanted to be when they grew up, you know, a complete scumbag that undermines faith in humanity. Because that's what they are, make no mistake, a drain on society and a waste of human flesh.
  And if that doesn't wake them from their behaviour then, well, go watch some Bill Hicks.
18. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by wvmarle · 2012-05-04 04:33 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The difficulty with the N900 was that they introduced one phone.
  
  Now I can think of a certain company that did quite well on just a single model phone. Just one model, their very first model, and it was a big hit. Every year or so an update on that one model, maybe selling the older model in tandem for a while, but basically their whole phone line-up is just one model.
19. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by c.r.o.c.o · 2012-05-04 04:40 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The difficulty with the N900 was that they introduced one phone. As an N900 user (still) I know that the N900 is not for everyone, and was targeted more at the tech-savvy user than your bog standard just-want-a-phone-that-works user. Not everyone wants a built in keyboard or a phone that large. In fact, one of the reasons I haven't changed phone is that it is so difficult to get a decent phone with a slide-out keyboard, similar the the N900. Suggestions welcomed...
  Nokia needed to produce several phones around a similar theme aimed at different users, or do what Apple did and produce one phone to a very high standard aimed at the average user, not at a niche market (80/20 rule). Doing what they did was narrow minded and poor business sense.
  This issue was discussed extensively on talk.maemo.org, but you are mostly correct. I had an N900 for a very long time, and not only did it have an awkward form factor due to its bulk and resistive screen (some UI elements were only accessible with the stylus), the hardware also had an enormous defect. The USB port would fall out even without being abused. At first Nokia denied the issue outright, but then started replacing the damaged phones. Which phone you'd get would be anyone's guess, ranging from the N900, N8 or E7.
  I still loved it though, and with care and a couple of mods my USB survived. I loved the fully customizable interface (for instance one thing that just pisses me off about Android is the desktop grid that insists on spacing icons miles away from each other unless you run alternative launchers). I loved the true Linux repositories and apps that did not have ads. Yes, developers should be able to make money, but on the N900 people developed apps like they do on Linux, because it's fun and interesting. And I never found myself missing any features because some random Android app did not have an N900 equivalent.
  The N900 was not without other problems. In Canada on my carrier I could only get Edge, not 3G. The hardware, while high end when the phone was released, is really old now and you could feel it. But most importantly, Nokia gave up on it only a year after its release. Ditching a high end, $700 phone so quickly is inexcusable. Their infrequent software updates, left bugs that were never fixed until the CSSU took over.
  And you simply can't maintain a community around a single device. Eventually my N900 broke down when I crashed my bike, and when faced with replacing it I opted for a much faster Android. Many lead developers for the N900 went the same route, and I can't blame them.
  So yes, Nokia should have released several devices running Maemo 5, and should have continued development of that platform. Jumping to Maemo 6, then Meego, then Windows only made them waste time and resources. I disagree with the need to always have a bleeding edge platform, which is why Maemo 5 was abandoned. Take the Samsung Galaxy Note for instance, which shipped with Android 2.3.5, a year and a half old OS and is extremely popular.
  
  Nokia's support for developers was, frankly, not an enjoyable experience. This is where being part of the Windows universe will be an advantage to Nokia as that will be Microsoft's responsibility, not their own.
  So they gave up control over half their product to a company that is known to release crappy OSes. Development and support may no longer be Nokia's responsibility, but it definitely affects its bottom line.
20. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by recoiledsnake · 2012-05-04 04:52 · Score: 2
  
  > by killing MeeGo, which is a production quality OS which kicks the shit out of Android and Windows Phone 7.
  And OpenMoko kicked the shit out of the iPhone too,right?
  Meanwhile in the real world, if there's no ecosystem or a company not capable of creating one, there is no sale.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
21. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Bert64 · 2012-05-04 05:13 · Score: 2
  
  The result of their strategy so far has been to accelerate their loss of market share, declaring symbian dead has been very effective at driving users away from the platform while changing plans for what your going to replace it with doesn't help.
  Also market conditions haven't changed that much, windows mobile was never very successful and windows phone wasnt very successful before the nokia deal so they had no real reason to believe it would be afterwards. On the other hand they had every reason to believe that switching their focus would cause customer losing delays, not to mention the loss of many existing customers who were either using symbian or waiting for meego.
  It was obvious to anyone that nokia's gamble on windows phone was extremely risky, with a very low chance of paying off... If i were a nokia shareholder i would be extremely upset by that decision.
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
22. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by 21mhz · 2012-05-04 05:32 · Score: 2
  
  And yet the N9 sold more than the Lumias, despite having limited market presence, few apps and no future whatsoever.
  If you repeat this urban myth a hundred times, it will become even more truthy.
  
  --
  My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
23. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Grishnakh · 2012-05-04 06:13 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I'm ok with fanboy comments. For whatever reasons, people frequently become fans of things they like, and like to talk about these things to other people. Back in the old days, it was Ford fanboys versus Chevy fanboys. Sure, fanboy comments can be annoying when they're dumb, but at least they're honest comments from people who actually like the thing they're defending (even if they're morons :-)
  Shills, however, are not the same. These are people who are professional liars, paid to act like a fanboy and talk about (or rather, generate hype or "buzz") something like they're really a satisfied customer, when they're not, they're just a plant. It's totally dishonest and despicable, and steps should be taken to keep these scum out. I like your idea about the new-account cooling off period, though I'm not sure it'll help that much because a professional shill will have the patience to wait out that cooling off period and then start making posts.
  The dropping of ACs, however, can be problematic. Many people make use of AC posting when they want to write something that could get them in trouble if it were linked to their real identity, and even though we use handles here, you can figure out a lot about people from their posting history and quite possibly figure out their real identity (and some people make no attempt to hide it and actually post their homepage). Being able to post sensitive stuff as AC helps keep it anonymous and lets such people speak their mind without much fear of their employer or whoever finding out. This would be a bad thing to lose, though on the other hand it would be nice to get rid of the many full-time ACs who just post trollish and assholish comments. However, I don't think this would help much with the shills; they seem to actually go to the trouble usually of getting a real account, so that they can appear more legitimate.
24. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by rtfa-troll · 2012-05-04 09:09 · Score: 2
  
  WP7 might fail and it might not, but to assume that MS and Nokia should just give up because they can't take over a market in one year is, well, pathetic.
  a) Nokia's interest is not the same as Microsoft's. Nokia should give up because Windows Phone will not become profitable within the time scale that they need to save the company (approx one year). Microsoft needs Windows Phone to save Windows. Microsoft makes all it's money from Windows and Office and will die as a company if they can't be protected. A space like Android or iOS without those is large enough for a competitor to grow up so Microsoft needs Windows phone if nothing else for the leverage. Also Microsoft is targetting the Mobile operators for profit stripping so they need a system from which they can prove their service side like Skype works. Windows phone provides that and makes it impossible for Apple to claim that Microsoft applications don't work.
  b) Nokia doesn't even have to give up. They just have to hedge their bets by making sure that they have an Android based system ready to go. At some time soon, the next month or so would be good; they just have to start producing that under a different brand from their "Lumia" handsets and gradually drop the "Nokia" part from the Lumia phones. They can sell off the Lumia production to Microsoft who simply could not afford to have it stop (see a) above) and so would be easy to "persuade" to part with a decent amount of money to avoid the embarassment of that happening. Probably this sale would have to be structured in a way which didn't make it obvious what was happening, but it would go through none the less.
  
  --
  =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
25. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by Luckyo · 2012-05-04 16:40 · Score: 2
  
  Nokia got to where it was by being #1 everywhere but in a single region (+unconquerable Japan). That region was North America.
  If you think that they were mostly selling cheap phones in Europe with their >50% smartphone marketshare, I have land on the moon to sell you.
26. Re:Another ridiculous lawsuit by graphius · 2012-05-05 08:54 · Score: 2
  
  Most countries have a frivolous lawsuit act. People trying to sue for dumb reasons get slapped. And dumb reasons are obvious.
  For example, in Canada if you give someone CPR to restart their heart, they cannot sue you because you broke one of their ribs.
Hahahahaha by GameboyRMH · 2012-05-04 03:00 · Score: 4, Funny

Whose platform is burning now, E-flop?

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
1. Re:Hahahahaha by Alex+Belits · 2012-05-04 03:03 · Score: 2
  
  Whose platform is burning now, E-flop?
  Still more profitable than Xbox, so it's OK.
  He is still a Microsoft employee, right?
  
  --
  Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
2. Re:Hahahahaha by Alex+Belits · 2012-05-04 03:38 · Score: 2
  
  Over the whole time the project existed, it's still billions in the red.
  
  --
  Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Oh yeah, baby. by tgd · 2012-05-04 03:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm going to sue for every stock I have that has lost value.
And when I'm done, I'm going to sue all the companies who didn't go up as much as I would've liked!
I'll be rich!
1. Re:Oh yeah, baby. by Racemaniac · 2012-05-04 03:04 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'll be rich!
  no you won't, but your lawyers will be :)
The ole' Embrace and Extend by sl4shd0rk · 2012-05-04 03:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

Historically speaking, entering any kind of business deal with Microsoft usually ends badly.

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
1. Re:The ole' Embrace and Extend by gtall · 2012-05-04 03:38 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I hate Microsoft like Satan hates his mother-in-law, but there's very little chance what you said is true. Some high profile cases have gone down the toilet hole, but a company the size of MS must work with hundreds of companies none of which would bother with MS if what you said was true.
2. Re:The ole' Embrace and Extend by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-04 03:52 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  When one of the world's largest corporations invests in you, you are not going to go out of business the next day, or the next year.
  ïMicrosoft's new "strategic partnership" with Nokia is not its first. For a decade the software company has courted and consummated relationships with a variety of companies in mobile and telecom. Here are the ones I can remember:
  LG. In February 2009 Microsoft Corp. signed a multiyear agreement for Windows Mobile to be included on devices from LG Electronics Inc. LG would use Windows Mobile as its "primary platform"for smartphones and produce about 50 models running the software.
  What happened? LG made a few Windows Mobile devices but with WinMo uncompetitive, they abandoned the platform and moved to Android losing years of market presence and all their profits.
  Motorola. In September 2003, Motorola and Microsoft announced an alliance. "Starting with the introduction of the new Motorola MPx200 mobile phone with Microsoft Windows Mobile software, the companies will collaborate on a series of Smartphone and Pocket PC wireless devices designed to create a virtual "remote control" for the Web-centric, work-centric, always-on-the-go mobile professional." In addition, the alliance includes cooperation on joint marketing and wireless developer programs.
  What happened? Motorola launched a series of Windows Mobile phones culminating in the Motorola Q "Blackberry killer". As Motorola hit the rocks in profitability new management reached for the Android liferaft. The company now relies exclusively on the Droid franchise.
  Palm. In September 2005 Palm and Microsoft announced a strategic alliance to "accelerate the Smartphone market segment with a new device for mobile professionals and businesses. Palm has licensed the Microsoft Windows Mobile operating system for an expanded line of Treo Smartphones, the first of which will be available on Verizon Wirelessâ(TM) national wireless broadband network."
  What happened? Palm shipped a few Windows Mobile, famously dismissing Appleâ(TM)s potential entry as something "PC guys" could never achieve. A new CEO, a private placement and an acquisition later the company is a division of HP making its own operating system.
  Nortel. When Steve Ballmer was famously laughing at the iPhone and saying that he likes the Windows Mobile strategy "a lot" he was sitting next to the then-CEO of Nortel (Mike Zafirovski formerly of Motorola) with whom the company had just closed a strategic deal. "an alliance between Microsoft and Nortel announced in July 2006 â¦ includes three new joint solutions to dramatically improve business communications by breaking down the barriers between voice, e-mail, instant messaging, multimedia conferencing and other forms of communication".
  What happened? Nortel declared bankruptcy two years later.
  Verizon. In January 2009 "Verizon Wireless has selected Microsoft Corp. to provide portal, local and Internet search as well as mobile advertising services to customers on its devices. The five-year agreement will go into effect in the first half of 2009 when Microsoft Live Search is targeted to be available on new Verizon Wireless feature phones and smartphones." The deal would ensure Bing distribution to all of Verizonâ(TM)s smartphone customers.
  What happened? Bing did ship on some devices but in October 2009 Droid came to Verizon.
  Ericsson. In September 2000, "Ericsson and Microsoft Corp. today launched Ericsson Microsoft Mobile Venture AB. This previously announced joint company will drive the mobile Internet by developing and marketing mobile e-mail solutions for operators. The first solutions are expected to be on the market by the end of the year. The company is part of a broader strategic alliance between Ericsson and Microsoft"
  What happened? Ericsson divested itself of the mobile division forming a joint venture which would go on and make more strategic alliances with Microsoft over Windows Mobile culmina
3. Re:The ole' Embrace and Extend by phonewebcam · 2012-05-04 04:08 · Score: 2
  
  That's about the best post I've ever seen on Slashdot. Sorry I can't mod up - others, please do the honours.
4. Re:The ole' Embrace and Extend by alexo · 2012-05-04 04:47 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Adding an attribution to Horace Dediu (the original author) is not that hard.
  Or possibly even a link to the original article.
5. Re:The ole' Embrace and Extend by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-04 05:06 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I think I'm perfectly within my rights of reposting my own material without attributing myself but thank you for your concern.
  --Horace
The Microsoft mobile kiss of death... by GameboyRMH · 2012-05-04 03:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

...claims another victim.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Does "class action suit" not mean what it used to? by Chrisq · 2012-05-04 03:04 · Score: 4, Interesting

From TFA:

Filed in New York by a single complainant, the class-action suit....
Surely if there is a single complainant then this should not be a class action suit?
Re:Does "class action suit" not mean what it used by Kjella · 2012-05-04 03:08 · Score: 2, Informative

Surely if there is a single complainant then this should not be a class action suit?
As I've understood it, in class actions you sue for "me and everybody else like me", you don't actually need more than one direct victim if the suit passes muster. Not that I think this one will..

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Does "class action suit" not mean what it used by micheas · 2012-05-04 03:10 · Score: 4, Informative

The single claimant believes that there are other people that have the identical claim and it would be in Nokia and the courts interest if there was one lawsuit instead of many lawsuits.
The problem for Nokia share holders is that it appears that their CEO is getting more compensation from Microsoft than Nokia, furthering this appearance of impropriety is his decisions that appear to favor Microsoft over Nokia.

--
Work bio at MMWD
Re:So by oh_my_080980980 · 2012-05-04 03:12 · Score: 2, Informative

The solutions is to get reparation for the losses they sustained do to Nokia's poor management.
Re:Stocks by oh_my_080980980 · 2012-05-04 03:13 · Score: 2, Funny

You know nothing about investing do you. That or you work for Goldman Sachs and love selling shit investments to your clients.
Re:Big Surprise! by oh_my_080980980 · 2012-05-04 03:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

Again, management claimed all was right and performance would improve. If management knew this was untrue, then management was lying to investors, which is illegal.
Nokia's accidental viral marketing campaign by sandytaru · 2012-05-04 03:15 · Score: 2

- the one they didn't actually have a hand in, in which an amusing Internet meme claims that the older Nokia phones are virtually indestructable ("Even Chuck Norris can't break one! So uses them for nunchucks!") - is probably going to do more for their brand reputation than any involvement with Microsoft ever could.

--
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
This is what happens... by hundredrabh · 2012-05-04 03:17 · Score: 2

when you elop(e) with someone MS.
Your shareholders will want divorce and demand alimony.

--
--whacky
As a N9 owner by scorp1us · 2012-05-04 03:17 · Score: 3, Informative

The rough edges of the N9 were minor. It came with real multitasking and copy/paste from the first version. It's a great phone, and despite its rough edges it would have worked out well. There are a few gaps though, not the least bit applications. Nokia makes up for th at by including support for many things right out of the box.
The biggest flaw with the N9 was that the OS was NOT a major OS. The decision to move to WP7, while lamentable was sensible. However I wonder if at the rate of innovation if the N9 would have been where it needs to be today.
The deal that was not struck that should have, was to get Samsung on board and using MeeGo. That would have brought enough attention to get MeeGo established in the mobile marketplace.

--
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Re:Does "class action suit" not mean what it used by 21mhz · 2012-05-04 03:37 · Score: 2

The problem for Nokia share holders is that it appears that their CEO is getting more compensation from Microsoft than Nokia
Source?

--
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
Re:Oh, come on!! by sideslash · 2012-05-04 03:41 · Score: 2

Everybody knows that any game console besides Playstation and Nintendo is doomed to extinction
FTFY.
Microsoft had a reason to destroy Nokia by Sara+Chan · 2012-05-04 03:47 · Score: 4, Interesting

Microsoft had a great reason to fear, and to conquer, Nokia: the Nokia N900. The N900 was arguably the best device ever: a full computer in a mobile form factor. It just needed some polishing of the user interface. Had the polishing been done, Nokia could have been on top of the smartphone market.

With the planned successors to the N900, people would no longer need separate phones and computers. They would just have their Nokia N900-successor, carrying that with them all the time. At home, or in the office, they would attach a keyboard wirelessly and plug in a screen--and there is their computer. This would have led to a revolution in the way both computers and phones are considered.

The N900 ran Linux. So the N900 was a vector for getting rid of Windows. Microsoft saw the threat, presumably, and moved to destroy it.
1. Re:Microsoft had a reason to destroy Nokia by SpzToid · 2012-05-04 04:41 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, just remove the Elop and you've got a killer N9/N950 product-line to introduce into a hungry public. Even though he relegated the sales of the N9 to the nether-regions of the world (*not* the EU or US mind you!), sales of the N9 best sales of Wp7 phones.
  Heck, the N950 is an awesome N9 with a keyboard and Nokia hasn't even sold any(!) The N950 were *given* to developers to code N9 applications. Nokia could ditch Elop and start selling linux smartphones again with products ready to go. No, Elop sells the Linux-phone factories and now he's actually building new ones in Viet Nam. What a (wealthy) train-wreck that former-Microsoft guy is, what with his Microsoft/Nokia shares/cash.
  Want numbers?
  http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2012/04/who-wants-numbers-lumia-on-t-mobile-lumia-800-vs-lumia-710-how-many-nokia-n9.html
  My N9 came from Switzerland and it is awesome. My neighbor bought one too and I explained how to setup www.12voip.com as a SIP account so he'd save money on calls. He said how come everyone doesn't know about this awesome phone that looks just like a Microsoft Lumia phone?
  The N9 has 64Gb possible (not 16Gb max as Lumia (00)
  front-facing camera (not Lumia)
  Swipe keyboard (awesome)
  SSH/VNC/PGP is a breeze
  To me, this N9 is like knowing to buy and hold on to something like a 1963 Corvette, but then I use linux for work so what do I know?
  
  --
  You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
Re:Does "class action suit" not mean what it used by s73v3r · 2012-05-04 05:08 · Score: 2

Generally in class action lawsuits, the "victims" weren't harmed for a lot individually to start with. Thus, without the class action, each of them would have had to sue the defendant individually, meaning they all had to separately pay for lawyers, which may or may not have been cost effective.
I'd like to hear your ideas on a better way to compensate a large group of people who had been harmed, but not to a large extent.