Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google and Microsoft Agree To Stand Down In Patent Wars

Posted by samzenpus on from the can't-we-all-just-get-along? dept.

_0x783czar writes: Today Google and Microsoft have announced an end to litigious hostilities between themselves; signaling another step on the road to peace as the "global smartphone wars" wind down. This moves settles 18 lawsuits in the U.S. and Germany, including those involving Motorola Mobility's patents, which Google retained after selling Motorola Mobility to Lenovo. Both companies hope this move will help settle the smartphone wars and refocus their efforts on consumers. Reuters reports: "Google and Microsoft have agreed to collaborate on certain patent matters and anticipate working together in other areas in the future to benefit our customers."

43 comments

  1. That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they really want things to change, they should agree to work towards abolishing stupid patents---not to create semi-trusts that other companies have to fight.

    --

    "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    1. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's the wrong outcome if you want goofy things like 'some punk startup turning into the next Microsoft or Google, rather than being a no-risk-to-us R&D venture to be purchased if they do come up with something cool'; but if you are Microsoft and Google; such an agreement is pretty sensible. Patent fights between 'superpowers' are expensive and largely no-win(yeah, individual cases do get won; but the settlements are tit-for-tat and nobody wants an import ban or something screwing up a product launch; and it's been largely settled that nobody has enough patents to stop the other from building 'a smartphone' of some reasonable usability); but being a superpower is good fun; and patents are still useful when encouraging people with neat stuff to sell to you rather than try to go it alone.

      (In an ideal world, hopefully we'd see both parties lobbying for changes that make this agreement obsolete; and if they do I'll revise my opinion; but that's still theoretical at this point.)

    2. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, you mean they've now formed a cartel designed to abuse their combined market power to keep other players out of the industry?

      Say it isn't so. I'm shocked, shocked I tell 'ya.

      Anti-competitive behavior in the free market? Why that seems so unlikely.

      No, wait, the other one ... big players will always for cartels to collude to fuck everybody else over, that's right.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      If they really want things to change, they should agree to work towards abolishing stupid patents---not to create semi-trusts that other companies have to fight.

      These two really don't want things to change.

      Much of their proprietary art is patent protected already, and let's face it: fighting patent litigation is generally going to favor the corporations with the biggest war chests.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by swillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If they really want things to change, they should agree to work towards abolishing stupid patents---not to create semi-trusts that other companies have to fight.

      Google has been spending tens of millions lobbying for patent reform, and only started to playing the patent game when it became clear that changing it wasn't going to work quickly enough -- though they haven't stopped trying to reform patents. The apparent contradiction has led some some pundits to question their motives, though I don't see that it's really a contradiction... the patent system is badly broken, but that doesn't mean Google can function in the industry as it is without playing the patent game. It's perfectly reasonable to play by rules you hate because that's what you have to do while simultaneously trying to change the rules.

      Personally, I think software patents are a crock, but I'm listed as inventor on a few of them. I hate the game, but it is what it is so I play it while donating to organizations trying to change it. My rule is that I donate 50% of my patent bonuses to the EFF. I suppose if I were a better man I'd donate 100% (after taxes), but I do like to have some recompense for the effort I put into writing disclosures.

      (Disclaimer: I'm a Google engineer, but I'm speaking for myself only, not for Google.)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are acting as if the patents were their creation in the first place

      Go back to your statement and rephrase that please.

    6. Re:That'e exactly the wrong outcome! by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Any form of patent system is naturally a deterrent to a free market as you have created an artificial monopoly by law and are using the government to enforce it. In any game with intelligent players, the best will tend to gravitate towards whatever strategy is most effective and in a world where neither party has enough patents to stop the other, it makes the most sense to cooperate against any third parties.

      You can't complain about one form of anti-competitive behavior when you have a system that is already enforcing a different form of anti-competitive behavior. Going on to blame "the free market" when we don't have one to begin with is just being dishonest. Your complaint should be that these form of government restrictions on the market are bad, not that the idea of the market itself is somehow a problem. If the rules are encouraging bad behavior, then it's the rules that need to be changed.

  2. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As much as I hate watching lawyers get paid ad infinitum, something about MS and Google working together leaves a bad taste in my mouth. After all, if you can't start a monopoly, start a cartel right?

    1. Re:Hmmm by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Exactly how good or bad this is seems like it will depend on how MS and Google treat 3rd parties, especially much weaker ones. If the prior case was "MS and Google sue one another pointlessly, also sue others" and now it's "also sue others", that's probably not such a bad thing, just a slight decrease in pointless litigation.

      If it is now "the MS and Google LA own all patents that Apple doesn't covering things that are rectangular, portable, turing-complete, or any combination of these; go on the warpath"; that would be very bad indeed.

  3. Wait think of the lawyers! by RichMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    How are lawyers supposed to make a living if people act reasonably?

    1. Re:Wait think of the lawyers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're supposed to make a living? Ah, I see it goes downhill from here...

  4. Well... by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    ... at least until one of them "Pearl Harbor"'s the other...

  5. Translation: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Google and Microsoft have agreed to target Apple in the smartphone wars.

    1. Re:Translation: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly this. Add in all the friendliness between Facebook and Microsoft, you can see that MS is all about getting everyone who isn't Apple and Sony in their cartel.

    2. Re:Translation: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google and Microsoft have agreed to target Apple in the smartphone wars.

      Actually, there's the other issue? Can anyone convince Apple not to be a bunch of dicks in bowling over everybody with their patents?

    3. Re:Translation: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except MS owns a small part of Apple too.

      So what is the theory now? The Senate doesn't realize the Senate leader is controlling both sides (Republic and Empire)?

    4. Re:Translation: by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Or Microsoft has decided that Android cant be unseated and its easier to fight for second place.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  6. to benefit our customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called "to better serve our customers" -- but perhaps Xerox has a patent on that.

    Images of well-roasted customers on silver platters with sprigs of parsley in their ears and baked apples in their mouths, nicely decorated, come up

  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. Admiral Ackbar by kbg · · Score: 0

    It's a trap

    1. Re:Admiral Ackbar by rmdingler · · Score: 1
      Or worse.

      They've decided to {shudder} combine forces and go all Pinky and the Brain on the rest of us.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:Admiral Ackbar by Xest · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it may well be. I'm intrigued to know what's in this for Google. Are Android phones still being artificially inflated in price by Microsoft's frivolous patent shakedowns against all Android manufacturers?

      The whole reason Google retaliated was because of that idiocy, and if Google is ceasing it's retaliation to halt Microsoft's counter-retaliation then Microsoft has won, and Google has lost hard. Anyone know if Microsoft is giving up on the billions it rakes in from those Android shakedowns? If it isn't then it's hard to see how this is anything other than a humiliating defeat for Google.

  9. Subtitle says by willworkforbeer · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Patent Lawyers Threaten to Sue Google, Microsoft for Loss of Income. "

    One litigator, misty eyed, related the personal side to this tragedy, "We had just ordered our (sniff) little Bernard and his sister Berkley their own matching custom ostrich-leather maid saddles... but now all our plans, even summering in the Maldives, everything is on hold....All this 'drop the litigation' talk is madness I tell you, Madness!"

    --
    Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
    1. Re:Subtitle says by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Been watching Secretary again? And again?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Subtitle says by willworkforbeer · · Score: 2

      Been watching Secretary again? And again?

      Well, no. But now I'm, um... curious? I think.
      Tell me, is there lots and lots of dirty lawyer shaming?

      --
      Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
  10. Stand Down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Opposite of sit up? Or is that a double opposite and so the same? Fucking British never make much sense.

    1. Re:Stand Down? by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      Opposite of sit up? Or is that a double opposite and so the same? Fucking British never make much sense.

      No the opposite of "Stand Down" is "Stand To" , it's from military parlance.
      Stand down = rest
      Stand to = be ready for action

  11. I don't trust either by CSHARP123 · · Score: 2

    We need to see how they work with other start-ups and third party companies. Since the complete details are not disclosed, does this mean, MS is not going to sue other Android marketeers?

  12. Google and Microsoft can't burn fast enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope this will somehow turn out to their disadvantage. Apple and Intel must die too.

  13. Coming soon, the greatest novel of our time! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    All Quiet in the District Court for the East District of Texas...

  14. TFA Got it Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The patent dispute didn't start when Motorola sued Microsoft over xbox infringement. Microsoft started this by suing Motorola for infringing, among other things, Microsoft's FAT patents and patents related to features in ActiveSync.

    Microsoft wanted to squash Android when Android was still nascent (didn't work, in case anyone hasn't been paying attention).

    1. Re:TFA Got it Wrong by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      So does this agreement mean people like you are becoming more irrelevant, god I hope so...

  15. Patent war is for sheeples' messiah Apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sheeples say Mehhhhhhhhhhhh!Mehhhhhhhh!Mehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!Mehhhhhhh says the sheeples.You apple's bitches sheeples.

  16. Peace! Let's get Samsung by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know how well Nexus phones are selling. MS Phones aren't. But my guess is that Samsung outsells them all.

  17. words matter by Tom · · Score: 1

    pet peeve: Can we stop calling everything a "war" ?

    Calling it a global smartphone war makes it sound like a real issue. What's wrong with simply calling it a conflict?

    We have enough actual, real wars. You know, with bombings, dead, raped, crippled and mutilated people. Calling a bunch of high-paid lawyers having an argument in a cozy courtroom a war is, IMNSHO, an affront to anyone suffering from a real war.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:words matter by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      What about Steve Jobs vs. Android?

      "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this,"

    2. Re:words matter by Tom · · Score: 1

      He's guilty of abusing words as well, unless he secretly owned a bunch of nukes. Your point is?

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    3. Re:words matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hereby declare war on pet peeves!

  18. From one Indian to another by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 1

    Maybe the fact the two companies are now led by Indian Americans also has something to do with the de-escalation? I don't know much about the different Indian cultures, but it appears that the families of both MS CEO Satya Nadella and and Google CEO Sundar Pichai come from southern India (different states though). Of course this doesn't explain why the former European American CEOs of the two companies couldn't get along with each other.

  19. Alternate title by penguinoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Patent trolls agree not to ruin their arsenal, save it for innovators.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  20. Meanwhile... on another battlefront... by spacepimp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft is pushing for prosecution that Android is an abusive Monopoly for incorporating their own Google based apps. fairsearch.org is comprised almost entirely by MS and their subsidiaries. There is no kinder gentler Microsoft.

  21. Instead, they have agreed to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    both focus on thwarting the foreign competitors, as adviced to them by various government instances. Good old American protectionism. Let's hope the EU and Asia steps up and fights the same game.

  22. Is Microsoft going to keep suing Google customers? by erice · · Score: 1

    This was never about Microsoft suing Google or Google suing Microsoft. It was about Microsoft suing Android phone manufactures for patent violations. Google themselves only became involved as a way to get Microsoft to back out. Essentially: "If you sue my customers I will sue you for violating Motorola patents".

    It looks like Google lost since TFA mentions nothing about Microsoft promising not to sue Android OEM's.