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. Links 23/10/2018: Mesa 18.3 Planned, RISC OS Adopts Apache Licence, Mozilla Firefox 63.0 Available

    Links for the day



  2. Microsoft's Patent Troll Intellectual Ventures Still Suing Microsoft's Rivals, Microsoft Gags Its Staff Regarding Patent Matters

    Microsoft says it's pursuing "truce"; the patent trolls it has created and backed (Bill Gates still backs them at a personal capacity) feel differently



  3. The EPO Under António Campinos Has Opened More Doors to Software Patents and Only Litigators Are Happy

    António Campinos continues Battistelli's tradition of shredding the Convention on the Grant of European Patents (EPC); it's all about generating as much assertion (e.g. litigation, shakedown) activity as possible, serving to bring Europe's productive industries to a halt



  4. German Court on UPC Constitutional Complaint: “No Oral Hearing is Currently Scheduled. A Decision Date is Not Foreseeable at Present.”

    More bad news for Team UPC as there's no sign of Germany signing/ratifying the UPCA and none of the underlying issues (noted in the complaint) have been addressed at all



  5. Links 22/10/2018: New Kernel Release and Linus Torvalds is Back in Charge

    Links for the day



  6. Lack of Patent Quality Means Lack of Patent Validity and Lack of Legal Certainty

    35 U.S.C. § 101 at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) -- like the European Patent Convention (EPC) on the Grant of European Patents -- stresses patent quality and scope; will patent offices get things right before it's too late or too expensive to undo?



  7. Data Engine Technologies (DET) Just One Among Many Microsoft-Connected Patent Trolls That Pick on Microsoft's Biggest Competitors

    Lawyers' articles/blog posts continue to obscure the fact that Data Engine Technologies is merely a satellite or unit (one among many) of patent trolling giant Acacia Research Corp., connected to Microsoft and sporting a long history of lawsuits against GNU/Linux



  8. Alice/Mayo and Hatch-Influenced US Patent Office

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) seems to be serving those who pay the most to define the scope or limits of patenting; this means that even nature and life are being 'privatised' (or turned into someone's "intellectual" property)



  9. Funded by the Public to Prey on the Public: The Absurdity of Patent Sales and 'Enforcement' by Government

    Government or US Government-funded entities are looking to tax private companies using patents that were actually funded by the public; in practice this helps private firms or insiders (individuals) personally gain from something that the public subsidised and should thus be in the public domain



  10. Lockpath Patents Demonstrate That the US Patent Office -- Unlike US Courts -- Keeps Ignoring 35 U.S.C. § 101/Alice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 isn’t being entirely followed by examiners of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); in fact, evidence suggests that mathematics are still becoming monopolies of private firms — something which should never happen



  11. The Eastern District of Texas and Its Patent Trolls Affinity Not a Solved Issue

    The American patent system continues to distribute monopolies on algorithms and some of these cause litigation to reach courts that are notorious for intolerance of 35 U.S.C. § 101, resulting in unnecessary payments to lawyers and patent trolls



  12. More 'Blockchain' Nonsense in Pursuit of Bogus, Nonsensical Software Patents

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is still granting abstract software patents because words like "blockchain" get mentioned in the applications; companies that do this hope to shield themselves from disruptive technology and possibly facilitate future patent blackmail



  13. A Warning About MPEG-G, the Latest Software Patents Trap That Threatens Innovation Everywhere

    Combining patents on software and on life, MPEG-G assembles a malicious pool with malignant ramifications for bioinformatics



  14. MIT and the Prior Art Archive Perpetuate Existing Problems

    Large companies with many tens of thousands of patents (each) would have us believe that broadening access/reach of prior art (e.g. to patent examiners) would solve the issues; This may very well work for these large companies, but it overlooks the broader picture



  15. Links 20/10/2018: Mesa 18.2.3 Released, FreeBSD 12.0 Beta 1

    Links for the day



  16. Unified Patents Demolishes Some More Notorious Patent Trolls and Offers Bounties to Take Down More of Them

    Even though the new management of the US patent office treats patent trolls as a non-issue, groups that represent technology firms work hard to improve things (except for the litigation zealots)



  17. The Identity Crisis of the European Patent Office, Wrongly Believing It Exists to Serve Lawyers and Patent Trolls Outside Europe

    The European Patent Office doesn’t even feel like it’s European anymore; it’s just an international patent office that happens to be based (primarily) in Munich; insiders and outsiders alike need to ask themselves what these ‘European’ officials (employing firms outside Europe) have turned the Office into



  18. Links 19/10/2018: OpenBSD 6.4 and OpenSSH 7.9 Released

    Links for the day



  19. Ingve Björn Stjerna Has Just Warned That If Team UPC and the European Patent Office Rigged the Proceedings of the German Constitutional Court, Consequences Would be Significant

    The EPO is back to mentioning the Unified Patent Court and it keeps making it abundantly clear that it is only working for the litigation 'industry' rather than for science and technology (or "innovation" as they like to euphemise it)



  20. Links 18/10/2018: New Ubuntu and Postgres

    Links for the day



  21. It's Almost 2019 and Team UPC is Still Pretending Unitary Patent (UPC) Exists, Merely Waiting for Britain to Join

    Refusing to accept that the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) has reached its death or is at a dead end, UPC proponents — i.e. lawyers looking to profit from frivolous litigation — resort to outright lies and gymnastics in logic/intellectual gymnastics



  22. IAM and IP Kat Are Still Megaphones of Battistelli and His Agenda

    IAM reaffirms its commitment to corrupt Battistelli and IP Kat maintains its stance, which is basically not caring at all about EPO corruption (to the point of actively deleting blog comments that mention such corruption, i.e. 'sanitising' facts)



  23. The EPO Under António Campinos Relaxes the Rules on Software Patenting and the Litigation 'Industry' Loves That

    EPO management, which is nontechnical, found new terms by which to refer to software patents -- terms that even the marketing departments can endorse (having propped them up); they just call it all AI, augmented intelligence and so on



  24. Links 17/10/2018: Elementary OS 5.0 “Juno” Released, MongoDB’s Server Side Public Licence

    Links for the day



  25. Improving US Patent Quality Through Reassessments of Patents and Courts' Transparency

    Transparency in US courts and more public participation in the patent process (examination, litigation etc.) would help demonstrate that many patents are being granted — and sometimes asserted — that are totally bunk, bogus, fake



  26. Ask OIN How It Intends to Deal With Microsoft Proxies Such as Patent Trolls

    OIN continues to miss the key point (or intentionally avoid speaking about it); Microsoft is still selling 'protection' from the very same patent trolls that it is funding, arming, and sometimes even instructing (who to pass patents to and sue)



  27. Links 1610/2018: Linux 4.19 RC8, Xfce Screensaver 0.1.0 Released

    Links for the day



  28. Judge-Bashing Tactics, Undermining PTAB, and Iancu's Warpath for the Litigation and Insurance 'Industries'

    Many inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) leverage 35 U.S.C. § 101 against software patents; instead of putting an end to such patents Director Iancu decides to just serve the 'industry' he came from (a meta-industry where his firm had worked for Donald Trump)



  29. 'Cloud', 'AI' and Other Buzzwords as Excuses for Granting Fake Patents on Software

    With resurgence of rather meaningless terms like so-called 'clouds' (servers/hosting) and 'AI' (typically anything in code which does something clever, including management of patents) the debate is being shifted away from 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101); but courts would still see past such façade



  30. Corporate Media's Failure to Cover Patents Properly and Our New Hosting Woes

    A status update about EPO affairs and our Web host's plan to shut down (as a whole) very soon, leaving us orphaned or having to pay heavy bills


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