EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

08.30.11

Microsoft in Embargo War Against Linux

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft at 8:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Old ship

Summary: Microsoft takes the Apple approach to pushing Java/Linux aside while Nokia gets more litigious as well

POOR Microsoft and poor Apple. They just do not know how to stop Linux anymore, so they join forces and attack en masse with help from patent trolls. Pay attention to what the Microsoft-led Nokia is doing right now. To quote: “Nokia (the Claimant) filed a claim with the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court (the Court) against Shanghai Huaqin Communication Technology Co., Ltd. (the Defendant) for RMB10 million in damages on the ground that the Defendant had infringed the Claimant’s rights of a patented product, which was a telecommunications device equipped with a camera.”

More patent aggression against phones. Not to mention Apple's appalling behaviour, which ended up in embargo after pathetic lawsuits. Apple ignored all prior art and tried to stifle the presence of competition (“Galaxy Tab delayed Down Under” says one news report).

Apple’s embargo culture is not paying off because the dispute that Apple has started results in Samsung not helping Apple in manufacturing anymore. It was reported last week that Apple already suffers shortages as a result. But guess who else has just embarked on the embargo ship? Yes, it’s Microsoft. The target is Google’s Android, making it the first time that Microsoft uses this level of sanctions against Linux, having tried it against hardware several years ago (mice from Asia). This embargo attempt was covered by Edward Qualtrough, among others. To quote:

Microsoft have joined the major technology corporation suing party and launched a suit to prevent the sale of Motorola mobiles in the US.

With each technology giant seemingly suing each other in a Royal Rumble-style lawsuit, Microsoft believe their latest action will ban a number of Google-owned Motorola phones in America, which Microsoft claim infringe upon seven patents. These include ways to synchronise calendars and contacts, as well as notifying applications of changes to signal strength.

Motorola phones are made overseas, despite Motorola being an American company, and the International Trade Commission could prevent the products reaching the States. This could pave the way for Microsoft to then argue their case in other markets.

This just shows how miserable Microsoft has become. We really need to get rid of those parent monopolies. The USPTO+ITC are out of control.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

4 Comments

  1. Michael Glasser said,

    August 30, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    Gravatar

    I responded to this post here: http://trw.gallopinginsanity.com/2011/08/30/stopping-linux

  2. Michael Glasser said,

    August 31, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    Gravatar

    Your “summary” mentions Java and Apple – but you never talk about Java in the article. That is odd.

    What do you mean by Apple shoving Java aside? Sure, they no longer include it preinstalled, but given that OS X now gets Java directly from the source, this means it will likely get better on OS X. Why do you put this down? And many desktop Linux distros do not have Java pre-installed either. Do you claim they are pushing Java to the side as well?

    Also: you claim Microsoft and Apple want to stop Linux, but you offer no support of this. You recently wrote about how Microsoft has ties to SUSE, even helping to fund it – but now you claim they want Linux to “stop”. If they are benefitting from Linux (as you claim), why would they want it to stop?

    You speak of Apple’s “appalling behavior” and claimed their lawsuits are “pathetic”. Two ways of looking at this. One way is to say that companies who sue for patent infringement are doing so because they are evil or want to compete unfairly. The other take on it is that companies have every right to protect their own work. I cannot buy a copy of the latest Stephen King novel, change the names and some other details and then sell it as my own. Even though authors base their work on what they have read before, their work is their own and I have no such rights to it.

    It does not take complex laws to understand this point. I have young children at home I read to; I recently finished a Romona and Beezus book where the concept was discussed in the context of a first grade classroom:

    In first grade, Susan copies Ramona’s paper bag owl. The
    teacher holds up Susan’s owl to show the class how pleased
    she is with her work. Ramona is so angry with Susan for
    copying and getting all the credit that she crumples up
    Susan’s owl. She gets in trouble for that, too, and is forced
    to apologize to Susan in front of the entire class the
    following day.

    While the term is never used, Susan copies Romona’s IP – and this is seen as being wrong by the main characters and it is assumed, without any sign of question, that the reader will get this. This is a book for kids. Yes, kids get the concept that taking someone else’s idea is wrong.

    In the open source ecosystem developers tend to have much less attachment to their work – they do not mind when it is used by others. Even then, though, the GPL makes it clear that there are limits on how IP can be used; if those conditions are not held to the owners of the IP have the right to insist – in court if needed – that those who use their code follow their wishes.

    When the shoe is on the other foot, and you think Apple is going against the IP rules of open source developers, you demonize Apple for breaking IP rules:

    SINCE the end of May we have been posting about half a dozen
    items about Apple’s hostility towards the GPL, which it
    excluded/removed rather than comply with.

    Another example of you complaining about Apple not complying with IP rules:

    Now that Apple is under fire for GPL violations (as stated by
    the FSF, which wishes to prevent Apple from illegally using
    GNU code against GNU itself), one ought to (re)think about
    Apple’s role in Free/Open Source software — code which worked
    pretty well for Apple, as long it ‘consumed’ and gave little
    or nothing in return.

    So when Apple does not respect someone else’s IP and, according to you, they are forced to comply it is Apple in the wrong. But when someone does not respect Apple’s IP and Apple works to force them to comply, then Apple is still in the wrong. This is an extreme double standard on your part.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    I didn’t ask you to start pasting entire blog posts into the comments section. That’s just abuse of the system. If you leave a comment, leave a comment, don’t produce mirrors here.

    Michael Glasser Reply:

    How about responding to some of the content?

    Why the attack on Apple for doing what many Linux distros do and no longer providing Java by default?

    Why do you sometimes say Microsoft wants to benefit from Linux by funding a “pet” distro, but other times say they want to stop Linux?

    Why do you focus on Apple and MS when the whole industry has this craze with suing each other (as shown at http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/mobile-patent-suits-graphic-of-the-day/ and http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethwoyke/2011/08/24/the-next-tech-patent-powerhouses)?

    Why do you assume Apple is wrong when they say others are abusing their IP but then assume OSS developers are right when they say Apple is abusing their IP (as detailed above)? My view is Apple and others should not unfairly use others IP. As to who is right or wrong – it should be taken on a case-by-case basis and not by just doing as you do and assume the companies you loath are always wrong, no matter which side of the claim they are on.

What Else is New


  1. Orrin Hatch, Sponsored the Most by the Pharmaceutical Industry, Tries to Make Its Patents Immune From Scrutiny (PTAB)

    Orrin Hatch is the latest example of laws being up for sale, i.e. companies can 'buy' politicians to act as their 'couriers' and pass laws for them, including laws pertaining to patents



  2. Links 17/6/2018: Linux 4.18 RC1 and Deepin 15.6 Released

    Links for the day



  3. To Keep the Patent System Alive and Going Practitioners Will Have to Accept Compromises on Scope Being Narrowed

    35 U.S.C. § 101 still squashes a lot of software patents, reducing confidence in US patents; the only way to correct this is to reduce patent filings and file fewer lawsuits, judging their merit in advance based on precedents from higher courts



  4. The Affairs of the USPTO Have Turned Into Somewhat of a Battle Against the Courts, Which Are Simply Applying the Law to Invalidate US Patents

    The struggle between law, public interest, and the Cult of Patents (which only ever celebrates more patents and lawsuits) as observed in the midst of recent events in the United States



  5. Patent Marketing Disguised as Patent 'Advice'

    The meta-industry which profits from patents and lawsuits claims that it's guiding us and pursuing innovation, but in reality its sole goal is enriching itself, even if that means holding science back



  6. Microsoft is Still 'Cybermobbing' Its Competition Using Patent Trolls Such as Finjan

    In the "cybersecurity" space, a sub-domain where many software patents have been granted by the US patent office, the patent extortion by Microsoft-connected trolls (and Microsoft's 'protection' racket) seems to carry on; but Microsoft continues to insist that it has changed its ways



  7. Links 16/6/2018: LiMux Story, Okta Openwashing and More

    Links for the day



  8. The EPO's Response to the Open Letter About Decline in Patent Quality as the Latest Example of Arrogance and Resistance to Facts, Truth

    Sidestepping the existential crisis of the EPO (running out of work and issuing many questionable patents with expectation of impending layoffs), the PR people at the Office choose a facts-denying, face-saving 'damage control' strategy while staff speaks out, wholeheartedly agreeing with concerned stakeholders



  9. In the United States the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Which Assures Patent Quality, is Still Being Smeared by Law Firms That Profit From Patent Maximalism, Lawsuits

    Auditory roles which help ascertain high quality of patents (or invalidate low-quality patents, at least those pointed out by petitions) are being smeared, demonised as "death squads" and worked around using dirty tricks that are widely described as "scams"



  10. The 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI) Hype, Propped Up by Events of the European Patent Office (EPO), is Infectious and It Threatens Patent Quality Worldwide

    Having spread surrogate terms like “4IR” (somewhat of a 'mask' for software patents, by the EPO's own admission in the Gazette), the EPO continues with several more terms like “ICT” and now we’re grappling with terms like “AI”, which the media endlessly perpetuates these days (in relation to patents it de facto means little more than "clever algorithms")



  11. Links 15/6/2018: HP Chromebook X2 With GNU/Linux Software, Apple Admits and Closes a Back Door ('Loophole')

    Links for the day



  12. The '4iP Council' is a Megaphone of Team UPC and Team Battistelli at the EPO

    The EPO keeps demonstrating lack of interest in genuine patent quality (it uses buzzwords to compensate for deviation from the EPC and replaces humans with shoddy translators); it is being aided by law firms which work for patent trolls and think tanks that propel their interests



  13. Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner Find the Courage to Express Concerns About Battistelli's Ugly Legacy and Low Patent Quality

    The astounding levels of abuse at the EPO have caused some of the EPO's biggest stakeholders to speak out and lash out, condemning the Office for mismanagement amongst other things



  14. IAM Concludes Its Latest Anti-§ 101 Think Tank, Featuring Crooked Benoît Battistelli

    The attack on 35 U.S.C. § 101, which invalidates most if not all software patents, as seen through the lens of a Battistelli- and Iancu-led lobbying event (set up by IAM)



  15. Google Gets Told Off -- Even by the Typically Supportive EFF and TechDirt -- Over Patenting of Software

    The EFF's Daniel Nazer, as well as TechDirt's founder Mike Masnick, won't tolerate Google's misuse of Jarek Duda's work; the USPTO should generally reject all applications for software patents -- something which a former Commissioner for Patents at the USPTO seems to be accepting now (that such patents have no potency after Alice)



  16. From the Eastern District of Texas to Delaware, US Patent Litigation is (Overall) Still Declining

    Patent disputes/conflicts are increasingly being settled outside the courts and patents that aren't really potent/eligible are being eliminated or never brought forth at all



  17. Links 13/6/2018: Cockpit 170, Plasma 5.13, Krita 4.0.4

    Links for the day



  18. When the USPTO Grants Patents in Defiance of 35 U.S.C. § 101 the Courts Will Eventually Squash These Anyway

    Software/abstract patents, as per § 101 (Section 101) which relates to Alice Corp v CLS Bank at the US Supreme Court, are not valid in the United States, albeit one typically has to pay a fortune for a court battle to show it because the patent office (USPTO) is still far too lenient and careless



  19. Buzzwords and Three-Letter Acronyms Still Abused by the EPO to Grant a Lot of Patents on Algorithms

    Aided by Microsoft lobbying (with its very many patent trolls) as well as corrupt Battistelli, the push for software patenting under the guise of "artificial intelligence" ("AI") carries on, boosted by Battistelli's own "Pravda" (which he writes for), IAM Magazine



  20. The United States is Far Better Off With the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), So Why Do Lawyers Attack It?

    The anti-PTAB lobby (which is basically the pro-troll or pro-litigation lobby) continues to belittle and insult PTAB, having repeatedly failed to dismantle it; in the meantime PTAB is disarming several more patent trolls and removing from the system patents which were granted in error (as well as the associated lawsuits)



  21. Links 12/6/2018: Neovim 0.3 and Wine 3.10

    Links for the day



  22. Corrupt Benoît Battistelli Promotes Software Patents in IAM's Patent Trolls-Funded Event in the United States

    With less than 3 weeks remaining for Battistelli's term he engages in gross revisionism, lobbying, and even looting of the patent office



  23. The EPO's 'Expert' Georg Weber is Still Advocating Software Patents in Europe (But He Disguises Them Using Buzzwords)

    The EPO's overzealous support for software patents continues unabated while the European Parliament looks the other way; this is part of the plan to expand patent scope in Europe and flood the continent with low-quality patents (causing a ruinous litigation boom like in China)



  24. Battistelli's EPO is Outdoing North Korea When It Comes to Propaganda and Abuses Against Staff

    Battistelli’s ‘scorched Earth’ approach — his sole legacy at the EPO — has left many workers in mental breakdowns (if not dead), but to celebrate the ‘Battistelli years’ three weeks before the end of his term the Office issues new propaganda material (pertaining exclusively to the Battistelli years, 2010 to 2018) while Battistelli-leaning media offers ‘cover’



  25. IPBC, a Patent Trolls-Funded Event of IAM, is Advancing the Attacks on Section 101/Alice

    Andrei Iancu preaches to the litigation 'industry' in an event (lobbying opportunity) organised by the patent trolls' lobby, IAM



  26. PTAB Carries on Undeterred and Unabated, Courts Are Becoming Less Tolerant of Low-Quality Patents

    With the shift away from the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) and with PTAB applying growing levels of scrutiny to patents the likelihood that abstract patents will endure at the patent office or the courts is greatly diminished



  27. Apple v Samsung Not Over, Hearing on a New Design Patent Trial Next Month

    Apple's legal battles against phones that have Linux inside them simply aren't ending; meanwhile, there's more evidence that Apple would be wise to simply push for patent reforms, namely further restrictions on patent scope



  28. Links 11/6/2018: Qt 5.9.6 and Weblate 3.0.1 Released

    Links for the day



  29. Latest Docket Reports Show That the American Courts/Legal System Still Anything But Patents-Hostile

    "Damages" (or so-called 'harm') from patent infringement, as demonstrated in the US earlier this month, still an overrated concept which leads to overinflated "compensation" for infringement; the patent microcosm's claims that US courts have become "anti-patent" are laughable at best



  30. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe Blind to Its Participation in a Scam Around Patents on Nature

    For over $20,000,000 (so far) the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe has agreed to pretend that it has something to do with controversial patents of Allergan, in effect grossly abusing the concept of tribal immunity while at the same time enabling privatisation of nature


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts