Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Files Legal Action Against Samsung Over Android Patent Dispute

Posted by Soulskill on from the ready-for-a-rematch dept.

DroidJason1 writes: Microsoft has filed a contract dispute lawsuit against Samsung over what Microsoft claims is a breach of contract by Samsung involving Android patent royalties. Back in 2011, Samsung voluntarily entered into a legally binding contract with Microsoft in a cross-licensing IP agreement involving Android patents. Samsung has grown over the past few years and now believes that Microsoft's recent acquisition of Nokia nulls the agreement. Microsoft has gone to court and is asking to settle the disagreement with Samsung in order to continue the original agreement.

8 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Laugh all the way to the bank by CptChipJew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only people winning this are the IP lawyers.

    --
    Vonal Declosion
    1. Re:Laugh all the way to the bank by queazocotal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can't really comment without seeing in full, the original agreement, and preferably scrutinising it in detail, along with any precedent in the relevant courts.

      There could have, for example, been agreements as to Microsoft not doing some things in the phone space - such as for example selling android phones - that it's reasonable to argue (from Samsungs perspective) Microsoft has breached, voiding the original deal.

    2. Re:Laugh all the way to the bank by andydread · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mod me flamebait, but I am with Microsoft on this one. As mentioned in their press release at http://www.microsoft.com/en-us..., Samsung agreed that "Microsoft will receive royalties for Samsung’s mobile phones and tablets running the Android mobile platform".

      I don't know how Samsung thinks it can use Microsoft products without paying for them. I paid for my copy of Windows, and I expect Samsung to do the same.

      its very simple. They are not using microsoft products. This is not about Windows. This is Microsoft's attempt to use software patents to steer people away from using Android and Chrome OS on their general purpose computing devices. this is about software patents that should have never been filed and should have never been granted. The supreme court has recently spoken regarding this matter. loading text before images is not patentable along with the myriad of other junk software patents that Microsoft is using against Android.

    3. Re:Laugh all the way to the bank by SkunkPussy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      TBH if microsoft have continuously failed to gain traction in the mobile phone market, I don't really see why its reasonable for them to tax the companies who've made a product people want to use.

      --
      SURELY NOT!!!!!
    4. Re: Laugh all the way to the bank by queazocotal · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Whether you think Microsoft's position is meritless or not, Samsung entered into a contract with them. They didn't ask a court for a legal opinion, they just stopped paying. You can't make unilateral decisions like that. "

      Err - no.
      In very rare circumstances do you ask a court to rule on a contract before anything has happened.
      Their general response will be 'dismissed, you bear court costs, that's why you pay lawyers'.
      The courts are in general not interested in offering legal advice - that's what you get expensive lawyers for.

      This is exactly how contract law normally works.
      X does something.
      Y thinks they breached their contract, and consults their lawyers who agree that X breached the contract and has no right to future payment.
      X says they diddn't, and their lawyers disagree.
      Y stops paying.
      X takes Y to court for non-payment.

      Y cannot - at the first step - in most cases ask the court for an opinion.

  2. Re:Samsung: so sue us by machineghost · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wait, since when did ethics have anything to do with IP law?

  3. Change of circumstances/ by maroberts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A number of factors could have changed since 2011, apart from the possibility of patents expiring.

    Samsung could have had a cross licensing agreement with Nokia, meaning Microsoft was getting paid twice. Also the US IP law has become more hostile to abstract patents, which probably form the bulk of Microsofts patent portfolio. Ironically Microsoft has probably picked up a bunch of Nokia patents, which may be much more useful in a patent slinging fight.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  4. Re:Samsung: so sue us by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Samsung's position is entirely rational, but less than ethical.

    How can you comment on the ethics of what Samsung is doing without actually having read the contract in full? For all we know the contract had a no competition clause which Microsoft may have violated by buying Nokia.

    That's the life of contracts. I'm involved in the shutdown of a major industrial plant in my city. The way these things happen is that you look at the costs of running, and you look at the costs of the alternatives. The alternative costs include things such as legal wrangling over details of contracts you're trying to get out of.

    It would be unethical to NOT try and get out of a contract which is costing you money for no good reason. This is just standard business practice and it's no different to arguing with your ISP who wants to charge you a full month even if your connection was unavailable for a week (been involved in this one as well and ended up getting a full month free).