Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft: We'll Help Customers Create Patents But We Get a License To Use Them (zdnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the catch-22 dept.

Microsoft outlined a new intellectual-property policy on Thursday for co-developed technology that embraces open source and seeks to assure customers it won't run off with their innovations. From a report: The shared innovation principles build on its Azure IP Advantage program for helping customers combat patent trolls. The new principles for co-developed innovation cover ownership of existing technology, customer ownership of new patents, support for open source, licensing new IP back to Microsoft, software portability, transparency, and learning. Microsoft president Brad Smith says the principles aim to assuage customers' fears that Microsoft may end up using co-developed technology to rival them.

[...] In return, Microsoft gets to license back any of the patents in the new technology but promises to limit their use to improving its own platform technologies, such as Azure, Azure AI services, Office 365, Windows, Xbox, and HoloLens. It also reserves the right to use "code and tools developed by or on behalf of Microsoft that are intended to provide technical assistance to customers in their respective businesses."

12 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. The irony is thick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A patent troll saying they'll help you with patents? This is rich, even for Microsoft.

    1. Re:The irony is thick by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A patent troll saying they'll help you with patents? This is rich, even for Microsoft.

      *Shrug* . . . it's basically the same deal if you work for a large enough company that has a patent department.

      It's your idea . . . your name is on the patent . . . but then it says, "Assigned To: [your employer]" in the title information.

      In my case, I received some cash awards for the patents . . . but who knows what they are really worth to my employer.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:The irony is thick by Shompol · · Score: 4, Informative
      Gee, I don't know where to start... Microsoft gets a few bucks off every Android set ever sold. Microsoft.... Android? Because Microsoft threatens manufacturers to throw an undisclosed number of patents if they don't pay up. Undisclosed, not because there are some specific ones infringed, but because MS can keep throwing until payout does not look so bad.

      And this is only one obvious troll. They usually troll under shell companies so cannot be linked to MS directly. This being probably most famous one. I know of a few others, and probably many more that we don't know about because we only know of the ones that leaked by accident.

    3. Re:The irony is thick by Solandri · · Score: 2

      That's actually one of the differences between working as an employee or a contractor. Everyone likes to trash talk contractor jobs, but if you're an employee then any IP you create belongs to your employer. If you're working as a contractor and come up with something on your own that's outside the scope of what you were contracted to do (i.e. not a work for hire), then it belongs to you. A company could try weaseling a clause into your contract saying any IP you develop belongs to them, but intellectual property is one of the benchmarks the IRS uses to determine employee or contractor classification. So any company doing that risks an IRS audit determining you were an employee and not a contractor, and being on the hook for back pay and benefits.

      It's the standard risk-reward tradeoff. Being an employee is low risk (guaranteed paycheck), but likewise the reward is low (stuff you create belongs to your employer). A contractor (basically a small business owner) is high risk (pay is on a per-job basis and not guaranteed), but likewise the reward is high (you own what you create unless you were specifically commissioned to create it).

  2. For a fee... by jd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...Microsoft will troll you with your own patents. It's a superb get-rich-quick scheme.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:For a fee... by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      If I had to guess, they've got lawyers on salary. Effectively, they've already been budged in advance. What do you got? Even if you win, you lose. They could financially bleed you dry until you give up.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  3. Sounds like a protection racket to me by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's a nice piece of tech you've got there, shame if something.. happened to it, say, from a patent troll. But your good old Uncle Microsoft is here to help you out, isn't that great? Since you're such a good guy, we don't even want anything from you -- we just want to help! -- but it would be nice if you'd let us use your technology, you know, just to make our own stuff work a little better.

  4. Re:License back? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I find more to the point, what is the long term support of this? Say I make an innovative piece of software, however it was outside Microsoft scope, 19 years later will they still help me protect my patent?

    Or say I want to license it to an other company say Apple? In that mess of legalese will I have the right to do so? And what is to say the Current Nice Guy image of Microsoft regresses back to Bully Microsoft that we seen with Gates and Balmer.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  5. Dumb Dumb Remember Spyglass, everyone? by ckaminski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To anyone choosing to suck on this carrot, may I remind everyone what happened with Internet Explorer and Sypglass?

    1. Re:Dumb Dumb Remember Spyglass, everyone? by thegreatbob · · Score: 2

      Blast from the past... I had never really read much into their relationship, but I guess Spyglass licensed Mosaic code and trademark from NCSA, but went on to develop their own codebase, which was in turn licensed to Microsoft. Microsoft seems to have come out rather well in that deal, all in all, despite having been sued (and a resulting settlement of 8 million USD on top of the initial 2 million) in the process.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
  6. While I'm skeptical about the service.. by Junta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I were a technology company, I wouldn't want to go anywhere near other people's future without something like a license to use the patents.

    I would be in great fear that someone in my company would do something that resembles a private draft of a patent one of those users is working on. This happens all the time by coincidence, but having access to customer research/draft prior to patent application just raises a lot more suspicion if you happen to do the same or similar thing as that research goes to.

    If you want a service to help you with patents and you want to keep control of it, you go to a legal company, not a technology company that is likely to have a conflict of interest.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  7. Bold Face Lies are in fashion these days by HeckRuler · · Score: 2

    "We'll help out with the legal aspect so developers don't have to worry about it. Trust us".

    Microsoft lies, news at 11.