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

09.26.19

Linux is Not Free Software and It’s Getting Harder to Fix It

Posted in DRM, FSF, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Kernel at 3:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

AMD (now the owner of ATI) puts DRM in Linux through graphics drivers

Protest against ATI
Source: Protest against ATI nearly led to the arrest of RMS (2006)

Summary: The battle for digital freedom has long been lost in kernel space; earlier this year Techrights analysed the complete source code of Linux to find DRM already well entrenched inside the kernel and it keeps spreading further (Linux is becoming the very thing the FSF objected to in Windows Vista; it is “Open Source Proprietary Software”)

THE technical limits of removal of blobs from Linux had been reached long before DRM landed inside Linux. For instance, linux-libre issues were already mentioned the other day; blobs are "bugs". What does that mean? In simple terms it means that ‘fixing’ Linux by removing bad stuff from it (not the same as a fork) would produce an unsatisfactory outcome. Moreover, it gets worse over time. It’s not only “subpar” or “not ideal”; it can be very messy. Ask people who use linux-libre in their distro.

“In simple terms it means that ‘fixing’ Linux by removing bad stuff from it (not the same as a fork) would produce an unsatisfactory outcome.”Some months ago Phoronix mentioned in passing that AMD was putting DRM in Linux (the evil DRM, not Direct Rendering). So did Intel along with Google. Yesterday Phoronix posted this update to say: “The recent work over the past few months on HDCP support for Raven Ridge and newer. Granted, many open-source fans won’t be happy to hear about High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) support coming to the AMD Linux driver but it’s already been supported by the open-source Intel driver and NVIDIA’s proprietary driver. The HDCP support is actually good news in one respect as it’s likely at the behest of Google with AMD APUs now appearing in Chromebooks, similar to Google having pushed along Intel’s Linux HDCP support. This HDCP support could lead to enabling AMD to compete with other design wins for other Linux-powered devices. If you don’t want AMD HDCP support, at least for now they have it exposed as a Kconfig option so you can disable building the support via DRM_AMD_DC_HDCP.”

“What happened to “Bad Vista” and “Defective by Design”? We don’t suppose that a Stallman-less FSF would do any better against such threats to our freedom.”What’s most curious here isn’t that AMD follows Intel’s footsteps (that’s typical) but the lack of statement or complete silence from the EFF, the FSF, the FSFE…

All those who claim to have opposed DRM didn’t keep their eyes on this ball. Had they done so, maybe AMD would at least have second thoughts about it. But no… and so Linux gradually gets ruined in the same way the WWW was ruined, owing to inaction on EME (DRM inside the ‘standards’). The FSF did speak about it and organised against it. Why not HDCP? What happened to “Bad Vista” and “Defective by Design”? We don’t suppose that a Stallman-less FSF would do any better against such threats to our freedom.

As a side note, Phoronix tries to remain neutral; the above oughtn’t be interpreted as Michael Larabel’s endorsement of DRM. Larabel has thankfully highlight many of these things over the years and for that he deserves our gratitude and support.

08.27.19

Computers Becoming Disposable

Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Hardware, Microsoft, Windows at 1:03 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

ZimmerSummary: People’s control over their own computers is being taken away; the model of rental better describes many of today’s purchases

IT HAS long been the case that computers are sold with an operating system rather than tested for a variety of them and handed over for the user to install one (of the user’s choosing). The bundling of operation systems has been an enabler of Microsoft’s monopoly, which pursued tying Windows to hardware and called everything else “naked PC” or “piracy”.

But there may be an even bigger problem, exacerbated in part by so-called ‘smart’phones, tablets and things such as Chromebooks. There seems to be no obligtation whatsoever to keep them updated for more than a few years; after that the users are left unable to upgrade the operating system and installing something else is technically difficult. There’s the expectation that this hardware will then be treated as ‘obsolete’ or “End of Life”, only for a new machine to be purchased to replace perfectly fine hardware. Of course the more technical people might choose to install GNU/Linux or otherwise deal with a critically vulnerable and out-of-date operating system that was never designed for security anyway.

“…there may be an even bigger problem, exacerbated in part by so-called ‘smart’phones, tablets and things such as Chromebooks.”What is Chrome OS anyway? Built on top of GNU/Linux or based on Gentoo, Chrome OS is designed to (mostly) spy on users and when it speaks of “Linux” it’s mostly just reinventing the wheel, allowing users to get back what they’d otherwise get on a platform such as Gentoo, including free updates, upgrades, maybe rolling releases.

Chromebooks were traditionally used to exchange the data invasion for subsidies that made these laptops somewhat cheaper, but at the higher end this is not the case. Announced yesterday, for instance, was this grossly overpriced product:

Google today announced a slew of Chrome Enterprise updates, including a faster Google Admin console and managed Linux environments. The company also unveiled the first Chromebook Enterprise laptops: Dell’s Latitude 5300 for $819 and Latitude 5400 for $699.

In August 2017, Google launched Chrome Enterprise for $50 per managed Chromebook per year. The subscription gives Chromebooks enterprise features like advanced security protections and fleet management. Today’s updates are Google’s latest push to bring Chrome OS to more businesses.

How long before the users are alerted that these are no longer supported and another expensive machine must be purchased to comply with business regulations?

“My laptop’s age is 10 and modern distributions can easily be installed on it without having to tinker with bootloaders, BIOS and such.”This is sadly becoming somewhat of a ‘norm’ — a normalcy wherein machines become ‘disposable’ even when they’re very expensive (almost a thousand bucks). There’s an envionmental impact.

My laptop’s age is 10 and modern distributions can easily be installed on it without having to tinker with bootloaders, BIOS and such.

The idea that Chrome OS can break Microsoft or end a Windows monopoly is a convenient one. But what are we striving to replace Windows with if not something that’s based on Linux but offers no freedom (libre)?

As somebody put it in a comment yesterday:

The battle is won, but the war is lost…

Everything runs on OSS these days, but the Libre part of it is missing more than ever. The biggest issue I see is the issue of “ownership”.
Physical ownership: I own my phone, my car, my house.
Virtual ownership: I own my data.

Streaming services are a case in point. You rent everything for $xx a month. If an actor becomes a persona non grata, and data with them is scrubbed (Think the Kevin Spacey situation, and, per events in march 2019, maybe upcoming with Michael Jackson), you don’t have access to it anymore.
Another case in point is Amazon’s removal of purchased e-books of 1984 from Kindle devices (in 2009, if memory serves).
You can’t (easily) rewrite a book purchased in paper form. You can rewrite an ebook.

The formula (Personal Hardware) + (Free Software) = (Digital Freedom) is more important than ever, but we do need to focus more on the Personal hardware part, and I agree it is part of a greater issue…

Control over one’s own hardware (that one pays for) is being diminished over time and with it the expectation of ownership as opposed to rent. We’re becoming mere tenants of what we’re paying a full price for.

08.16.19

Nothing Says ‘New’ Microsoft Like Microsoft Component Firmware Update (More Hardware Lock-in)

Posted in GNU/Linux, Hardware, IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat at 9:09 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“One thing I find myself wondering about is whether we shouldn’t try and make the “ACPI” extensions somehow Windows specific.

“It seems unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the results is that Linux works great without having to do the work.

“Maybe there is no way to avoid this problem but it does bother me.

“Maybe we could define the APIs so that they work well with NT and not the others even if they are open.

“Or maybe we could patent something related to this.”

Bill Gates

Summary: Vicious old Microsoft is still trying to make life very hard for GNU/Linux, especially in the OEM channel/s, but we’re somehow supposed to think that “Microsoft loves Linux”

YESTERDAY we saw Red Hat’s (now IBM’s) Richard Hughes complaining about Microsoft [1], whereupon Phoronix picked that up [2] and it was then discussed in our IRC channels, Phoronix forums etc. The corporate media obviously showed no interest in it. All it can do is post “Microsoft loves Linux” images because Microsoft asks for that. To quote Richard: “All the dependency resolution should be in the metadata layer (e.g. in the .inf file) rather than being pushed down to the hardware running the old firmware.”

“All the dependency resolution should be in the metadata layer (e.g. in the .inf file) rather than being pushed down to the hardware running the old firmware.”
      –Richard Hughes
As Michael Larabel put it, “implementation has a number of issues that complicate the process and could quickly evolve into another troubling specification from Microsoft in the hardware space.”

Remember UEFI ‘secure boot’? How did that work out for security?

Microsoft certainly loves Linux with a knife in the back — hence Bill Gates' "Jihad" remark (about Intel’s support for Linux). MinceR at the #techrights IRC channel said: “you can tell something from Microsoft is _really_ _really_ shit when their sycophants at GNOME say it’s shit…”

“Nowadays Zemlin is mostly quoted by the media as saying wonderful things about Microsoft. Most GNU/Linux user just want to vomit.”It is worth remembering that Richard’s work is now supported by the Linux Foundation (since months ago when it adopted LVFS), so maybe Richard can explain to the Linux ‘genius’ Jim Zemlin (who never uses Linux) what Microsoft does here and why it is anticompetitive. We don’t suppose this will happen though. Zemlin is a 'true believer' in Microsoft and his wife managed a close partner of Microsoft when Microsoft paid the Linux Foundation. Nowadays Zemlin is mostly quoted by the media as saying wonderful things about Microsoft. Most GNU/Linux user just want to vomit. Money talks; people who love money are therefore a vulnerability. Jim Zemlin and his wife are the sorts of people whose life aspiration is to have dinner with Bill and Melinda Gates. It’s all about class and power (Harvard). A decade ago Jim Zemlin said negative things about Microsoft and now (after/since Microsoft had given him $500,000) he says Microsoft is a good company while ignoring the below among many other things, patent extortion included (it's still going on). His wife worked for a Gold Microsoft Partner at the time (as a General Manager and Global VP of a SaaS Business Unit). Her business was moving companies to something like Microsoft Azure. In his own words (Jim Zemlin’s interview with Jeremy Allison; 1m:30s), “I’m about as much [boss of Torvalds] as I am the boss of my wife…”

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Musings on the Microsoft Component Firmware Update (CFU) Protocol

    CFU has a bazaar pre-download phase before sending the firmware to the microcontroller so the uC can check if the firmware is required and compatible. CFU also requires devices to be able to transfer the entire new transfer mode in runtime mode. The pre-download “offer” allows the uC to check any sub-components attached (e.g. other devices attached to the SoC) and forces it to do dep resolution in case sub-components have to be updated in a specific order.

    Pushing the dep resolution down to the uC means the uC has to do all the version comparisons and also know all the logic with regard to protocol incompatibilities. You could be in a position where the uC firmware needs to be updated so that it “knows” about the new protocol restrictions, which are needed to update the uC and the things attached in the right order in a subsequent update. If we always update the uC to the latest, the probably-factory-default running version doesn’t know about the new restrictions.

    The other issue with this is that the peripheral is unaware of the other devices in the system, so for instance couldn’t only install a new firmware version for only new builds of Windows for example. Something that we support in fwupd is being able to restrict the peripheral device firmware to a specific SMBIOS CHID or a system firmware vendor, which lets vendors solve the “same hardware in different chassis, with custom firmware” problem. I don’t see how that could be possible using CFU unless I misunderstand the new .inf features. All the dependency resolution should be in the metadata layer (e.g. in the .inf file) rather than being pushed down to the hardware running the old firmware.

  2. Microsoft’s Component Firmware Update Is Their Latest Short-Sighted Spec

    Microsoft’s newest specification is the “Component Firmware Update” that they envision as a standard for OEMs/IHVs to be able to handle device firmware/microcode updating in a robust and secure manner. While nice in theory, the actual implementation has a number of issues that complicate the process and could quickly evolve into another troubling specification from Microsoft in the hardware space.

    Red Hat’s Richard Hughes who is the lead developer on Fwupd and LVFS for firmware updating on Linux has written a lengthy blog post with his thoughts after studying the specification. Now that vendors have begun asking him about CFU, he’s getting his opinions out there now and there are issues with the specification. Ultimately though if there is enough interest/adoption, he could support Component Firmware Update via Fwupd but he certainly isn’t eager to do so.

08.04.19

Microsoft’s War on the Right to Repair (One’s Own Computers) Makes Lundgren an ‘Enemy’ to Microsoft

Posted in Hardware, Microsoft, Windows at 12:24 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Overview

Microsoft’s Declaration of War on Recyclers

  • Part 4: Microsoft Being Microsoft, Bullying Everyone Who Reduces Microsoft’s Profits
  • You are here ☞ Part 5: Microsoft’s War on the Right to Repair (One’s Own Computers) Makes Lundgren an ‘Enemy’ to Microsoft
  • Part 6: Damage Control Mode: Satya Nadella Fleeing Lundgren After Realising What Microsoft Had Done
  • Part 7: Slander and Libel From Microsoft (Demonising the Victim)
  • Part 8: Similar High-Profile ‘Bargains’ (Aaron Swartz and Marcus Hutchins)

The Legal Aftermath

Pending review and research

Microsoft killed RightToRepair

Summary: Microsoft killed legislation that allows people to repair their own computers and gadgets (that they paid full price for), so why not also destroy the life of a prominent recycler who helps hardware repairs at a vast scale (reducing demand for new electronics with new Microsoft Windows licences)?

TECHRIGHTS recently embarked on this series which may seem like old news even though some of the material is new. There’s new information and all material has rock-solid sources. We’ll also be posting proof, evidence, court material etc. There’s no lack of it. The Washington Post’s coverage of the Eric Lundgren case dealt with what happened last year and the year before that (see “Eric Lundgren, ‘e-waste’ recycling innovator, faces prison for trying to extend life span of PCs” and “How did this advocate of e-waste reuse end up behind bars?). The Verge explained that by attacking Eric Lundgren Microsoft very well knew that it attacked everyone who recycled old PCs (“E-waste guru going to prison says cracking down on refurbishers is ‘harmful to society’). The Verge, formerly edited by Bill Gates, unfortunately ended up amplifying Microsoft. On the same day it published a headline that contained Microsoft’s deliberate lie (‘he was counterfeiting Windows software’). Even Microsoft knew this was false, but again, this is Microsoft. Facts don’t matter. Only profits matter. As we shall explain in a moment, Microsoft’s attack on Lundgren was very much consistent with the company’s disdain if not sheer hatred of recycling in general. Lundgren and Microsoft are philosophically and ethically opposed.

“I currently support #RightToRepair,” Eric Lundgren told me after I had asked him about Software Freedom, e.g. use of GNU/Linux on recycled machines. “I currently support PIRG.” To quote the site: “Most of us have dozens of electronic devices in our lives, from smart phones and home computers, to inkjet printers and flat screen TVs. Things don’t last like they used to—a tiny broken part or outdated software can mean the end of the road, and the life spans seem to get shorter and shorter. This endless cycle of make, use, replace, and throw away may be good for the electronics companies’ bottom line, but when we stop and consider the impacts on the environment, and the threat to our health, it just makes no sense.

Scroll down a just a little bit to find “TELL MICROSOFT: DON’T PUNISH RECYCLERS” (PIRG supports Lundgren in return, sending the love back). Lundgren is extremely popular among recyclers, but Microsoft defamed him to that effect (trying to portray him as a foe or a threat to the recyclers’ world). We’ll come to that later in this series. The demonisations were rather outlandish and way beyond insulting. Lundgren still thinks about suing over it. These psychological attacks (fabricating things and making up stuff to dehumanise the victim) have long-lasting effects.

To quote that page (the relavent part): “Microsoft pressed criminal charges against Eric Lundgren for making restore disks that allow people to fix old computers—even though the software on those disks is available online for free. We need to stand up for repair—or risk a chilling effect on repair and refurbishing, a key strategy to reducing electronic waste.”

It cannot be stressed strongly enough that recyclers support Lundgren; Microsoft tried driving a wedge between him and other recyclers. Did that work? Not exactly, but it served to show just how evil Microsoft still is. The only lesson here is that Microsoft would do anything to destroy critics. Last month we presented many other examples (Microsoft phoning people’s bosses, trying to get these people fired because of their stance on Microsoft). Microsoft is a bully incorporated into company form. It acts like a violent cult.

Further down PIRG tell “Eric Lundgren’s Story”:

Eric Lundgren is a recycling entrepreneur, and has made it his mission to extend the life cycle of used electronics. At age 19, he started a company that takes discarded electronics and rebuilds them into new, functional devices, thereby diverting working electronics from landfills. He even built the world’s longest-range electric car out of electronic waste, or e-waste, and set the world record for distance on a single charge.

Lundgren developed a strong passion for this cause in his twenties when he decided to follow America’s exported e-waste. He witnessed the harmful and toxic effects e-waste landfills had on people living in China, India and Africa at that time. It was clear that we needed to do more to keep toxic e-waste to a minimum.

But, Lundgren is heading to prison for providing restore disks that allow people to fix their old computers. Even though this software is given to everyone who buys a computer with a licensed operating system and can be downloaded for free, Microsoft decided to press criminal charges against Lundgren for planning distributing the disks to help people keep their own computers running longer. Eric did put the Microsoft logo on the disk, which is a copyright violation, but since the software is available for free, it’s not clear how Microsoft could claim this is criminal violation. Why not just ask that he take their logo off the disks, which he would surely have agreed to do?

While this is an extreme example, it could set a dangerous precedent and result in a chilling effect on electronic refurbishing across the globe. We’re standing up for repair by calling on Microsoft to work with people who recycle—not criminalize them.

Together, we can make sure Eric is last person who faces prison for doing what we all need to do more of—repair and reuse.

“Best to be guided by your heart’s conviction,” Lundgren told me. He wants justice. He also wants to recycle. Both things can take a lot of time and effort, endless energy, leading to fatigue. Mental exhaustion may seem inevitable, but Lundgren is surrounded by a lot of supportive people, who love him and want to help him. They give him hope and motivation. Microsoft was unable to change that (it tried hard). Worse — Microsoft is just making more enemies. Its attacks on Lundgren will backfire in a very big way.

“Microsoft fights the right to repair,” I told Lundgren. “The site Motherboard [among others] covered how Microsoft fought this legislation…”

“That is true,” he responded. “The founder of #RightToRepair told me all about it.”

And “that was months ago,” I continued, so “you probably could not read that at the time” (Lundgren was still in prison).

A lot of the media focused on Apple’s role (fighting the ‘Right to Repair’), e.g. [1, 2]. Lundgren heard all about it by now. He also mentioned the CEO of IFixIt.com. They have their rants about Microsoft-branded hardware (notoriously difficult to repair).

Cory Doctorow covered the issue back in April, a year after Lundgren’s time behind bars had commenced (Not just Apple: Microsoft has been quietly lobbying to kill Right to Repair bills). “I like Cory Doctorow,” Lundgren noted. “He is a smart dude!”

It’s also well within his ‘ballpark’. He wrote about digital obsolescence for decades. One article of interest comes from PIRG and is entitled “Microsoft named as stopping “Right to Repair” in Washington”. We linked to it at the time (when it was new). Here are some key passages:

In an interview on iFixit’s Repair Radio, Morris, who was the original sponsor of the bill last year, claimed that “word on the street” was that big tech companies, specifically Microsoft, “marshaled forces to keep the bill from moving out of the House Rules committee.”
Rep. Morris further claimed that, while he didn’t see the “smoking gun,” “there was a tax proposal here…to pay for STEM education.” Furthermore, “in exchange for Microsoft support[ing that tax,] having Right to Repair die…” was a condition, as well as another privacy policy Microsoft wanted to advance.
He shed some light on the kinds of things Microsoft lobbyists were doing, saying that last year, “Microsoft was going around telling our members that they wouldn’t sell Surface Tablets in Washington any longer if we passed the bill.”
In our own conversations about the opposition to Right to Repair in Olympia, Microsoft’s full-throated opposition was often brought up by legislators, and it was to clear to us that the company was lobbying extensively against the bill, and was the most high-profile opponent.
Across the country, large manufacturers like Microsoft and Apple tend to do much of their public opposition to Right to Repair through trade associations. Microsoft is among the manufacturers represented by trade groups like CompTIA, Consumer Technology Association, Information Technology Industry Council and the Entertainment Software Association, which are all active opponents to Right to Repair reforms.
These trade associations can mask the role of an individual company, but are one of the key ways the opposition works to defeat pro-consumer Right to Repair legislation. But the behind-the-scenes targeting of Right to Repair by Microsoft seemed to play a more significant role in the bill’s demise.

Microsoft has a complicated recent history on repair

Last year, electronics recycler Eric Lundgren went to prison for duplicating Dell restore discs, software meant to help fix old computers and that is free to download. Microsoft faced intense scrutiny for their actions in that case.
In response, U.S. PIRG delivered more than 11,000 petitions to Microsoft offices, calling for greater accountability for electronic waste disposal and easier access to the tools and information needed to repair products.
The case also brought attention to several other ways Microsoft makes it difficult for people to reuse its products: lobbying against Right to Repair laws, violating warranty regulations by attempting to forbid independent repair in warranty clauses and “void warranty if removed” stickers, and making several products which are notoriously difficult (if not impossible) to repair.
On the other hand, Microsoft has taken steps to help computer recycling and reduce waste, making a new operating system that runs smoothly on older devices, reducing the need for new upgrades. That’s no small step, and iFixit praised it at the time.

“According to State Rep. Jeff Morris, Microsoft played a leading role,” PIRG said (a role in killing the bill). Here’s the video in which it’s covered:

On occasions I asked Lundgren about rejecting Windows and just putting GNU/Linux on computers instead. “I’m all hardware via Recycling,” he emphasised. “Don’t really know too much about software.”

Microsoft Being Microsoft, Bullying Everyone Who Reduces Microsoft’s Profits

Posted in Hardware, Microsoft at 1:37 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Overview

Microsoft’s Declaration of War on Recyclers

  • You are here ☞ Part 4: Microsoft Being Microsoft, Bullying Everyone Who Reduces Microsoft’s Profits
  • Part 5: Microsoft’s War on the Right to Repair (One’s Own Computers) Makes Lundgren an ‘Enemy’ to Microsoft
  • Part 6: Damage Control Mode: Satya Nadella Fleeing Lundgren After Realising What Microsoft Had Done
  • Part 7: Slander and Libel From Microsoft (Demonising the Victim)
  • Part 8: Similar High-Profile ‘Bargains’ (Aaron Swartz and Marcus Hutchins)

The Legal Aftermath

Pending review and research

The WannaCry Hero Deserves a Pardon, Not a Conviction and analogy of Marcus Hutchins
Reference: The WannaCry Hero Deserves a Pardon, Not a Conviction

Summary: People who serve society the most (to the chagrin of some corporations and secret vested interests) are being put in prison or threatened with life in prison (i.e. death); Eric Lundgren is a classic example of that because his work reduces consumption/sales

THE incredible story of Eric Lundgren is one that Microsoft hoped — if not prayed — would go away by now. It’s one of Microsoft’s ‘skeletons in the closet’. We’re opening this closet. We sensed the stench from the outside and it is a lot worse when one takes a mere peek inside. Lundgren has been released and he has a lot to say. He has so much to show. Unlike 1.5 years ago, there’s none of that immense stress of a courtroom clocking legal bills (about a million bucks), facing potentially decades behind bars. Now it’s time to spill the beans. The record needs to be set straight. It must.

We’re angling or planning to start presenting legal documents soon. The story presented in prior parts reveals 1. media manipulation; 2. distortion of court processes; 3. lies told to court and 4. defamation in media (defamation of an already-vulnerable and poorly-funded defendant).

As Mr. Lundgren put it, the problem with these court documents is that they show “no one in the room knew what a “Restore CD” was… or worse — they knew and convicted me anyway.”

As The Verge put it in April 2018, E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software (free as in gratis).

There are at least half a dozen aspects to cover in this case. The injustice is multifaceted and rather breathtaking. Thankfully, court documents are a written documentation and maybe transcriptions too can help show the lying, the distortion, the mobbing. There was character assassination and outright defamation (intentional). If the story stays in our news cycle for weeks/months, making a difference when it comes to public opinion, then at least we can clear the person’s name. He will never get his life back, but why live in shame too? Microsoft on the Issues — Microsoft’s nefarious lobbying blog — defamed him under the guise of “The facts” (that’s in the title!). It led to puff pieces such as Microsoft defends conviction of e-waste recycler over piracy (they actually used the word “piracy”). That’s how Engadget portrayed him, comparing him to a murderer at high seas (false equivalence from Hollywood); An e-waste recycler is going to jail for ‘pirating’ Windows was another headline from the same publication. Putting aside the propaganda term “pirating”, this isn’t what actually happened. For a lot of people who look up “the facts”, however, defamatory material like “the facts” from Microsoft on the Issues will become visible. Are they reading about a recycler looking to reduce waste on this planet? Or a pirate who attacks ships/boats, possibly holding as hostages (or killing) crew members?

“The truth is in the details,” Lundgren told me this weekend. “I did NOT copy or distribute MSFT [Microsoft] License.”

See Hackaday’s The Eric Lundgren Story: When Free Isn’t Free or “E-waste warrior slapped with 15-month sentence for flogging Windows restore discs“. These aren’t installation CDs but “restore discs”.

“Nothing was sold,” Lundgren insisted. “It was just the freeware Restore-CD that no-one sells.”

The last version of Windows that I used was Windows 98 and I remember receiving such CDs, twice even (the vendor sent me more). So I had two sets of CDs for the same laptop, which had come with a licence to use Windows.

“It did not cost MSFT a dime,” Lundgren continued. “They already sold the product that I was trying to help consumers legally use.”

This isn’t even a new practice! Compaq gave me that laptop with the restore CDs, even several times (they sent me more later). This was perfectly legal. The purpose of these CDs was crystal clear. Having more restore CDs does not imply having more copies of Windows. It’s like a ‘factory reset’ utility.

Over time it seems increasingly clear that Microsoft just decided to bully a person and make his life miserable. Microsoft violated and corrupted the process at many levels and each represents a major scandal on its own (or in its own right). We’re increasingly convinced that they made an example of Lundgren in order to, at the very least, scare other recyclers (who think of doing something similar). More than a decade ago we wrote many articles on how they did similar things in other countries such as Oman and China. Now they do this in the US, at risk of the media getting hostile. They make ‘examples’ of people, sending them to jail for years just to set some legally-unsound precedent.

This whole case is totally insane!

“Dell wanted nothing to do with this,” Lundgren told me. “They refused to be involved. (These were Dell Restore CD’s) I went to those in charge at Dell, I was told that if anything I helped provide free tech-support.”

Herein we see another strand of scandals; the very person who was spreading Windows and providing gratis support is being thrown in prison by the very same companies/people he was helping. We wrote about the absurdity of it several times a decade ago (in relation to other countries). Microsoft is ascribing value to ‘freebies’ — to the point of criminalising those who legally pass these around and maintain the network effect, cementing the Microsoft monopoly/monoculture.

“There are many more points to discuss,” Lundgren stressed. Perhaps the simplest analogy that can be used here is putting people in prison for passing around discount vouchers/coupons; people who use these merely give more business to the shops, which still make a profit (in spite of discounts).

How was this court outcome reached?

“Judge threw out my expert witness and retired right after my case,” Lundgren told me. “Judge T.K. Hurley.”

It gets yet worse. “My lawyer shut down his practice and became a Judge Magistrate right after my case,” he continued.

We’ve seen it before in other cases and places. Appointment of judges isn’t always a ‘clean’ process and the ‘reward’ system does not necessarily reward legal success or absolute integrity. We have examples that were covered in the patent realm (so-called ‘IP’). Live and learn…

There’s a reason why someone like Bill Gates can commit so many crimes and never spend a night in prison. His father is well connected; he runs one of the biggest law firms in the country. He helps super-rich clients. Lundgren? Nope, he just mostly helps poor people. In future parts we’ll shed light on Lundgren’s positive contribution to society and thus the injustice of this persecution (bogus claims, defamation, and prosecution by the firm of pseudo-philanthropist Bill Gates).

“My legal battle cost $870,000 USD. (+) $50,000 Court Fine (+) 15 Month Prison Sentence (+) Felony,” Lundgren explained. So unless you’re a millionaire it renders you a prisoner for life. Financially indebted, unable to pursue work and so on.

Now that he’s out of jail (for a non-crime), Lundgren is trying to put back pieces of his life. His grandfather who had raised him died several days ago, so he is grieving with relatives. “I am currently creating an AI Platform to offer ‘National Free Home Recycling’,” he told me. ” It will be completed within the year and should aggregate & recycle more eWaste than all recyclers today. (Currently 18% of eWaste is Recycled & 82% is Exported or leaching toxic chemicals into our water table via landfills)…”

This is what Lundgren has done (almost) his entire adult life. He lives to do this. “I recently found an article done when I was (17) years old in “Business Pulse Magazine” where I am saying the EXACT same thing that I am saying today!

“It’s crazy,” he said. “It’s been 17 Years and my story hasn’t changed.. Still fighting for the same thing.”

07.26.19

Microsoft’s Legal Attacks on Eric Lundgren Demonstrate There’s No ‘New’ Microsoft Except a Super-Vicious, Law-Twisting Thug

Posted in Courtroom, Hardware, Law, Microsoft at 3:54 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

This post is based on an informal preliminary discussion with Eric Lundgren, whose ordeals we hope to explain in weeks to come

Overview

Microsoft’s Declaration of War on Recyclers

The Legal Aftermath

Pending review and research


Recycling batteries and plastic

Summary: The person whom Microsoft sent to prison for doing the moral thing has had an informal chat with Techrights, which plans to explore and study the case more closely

Yesterday we published an article about computer recycling (also published yesterday is this article about new Microsoft crimes, which are related to it). The subject is likely going to be part of an upcoming series, likely a rather long one (there’s another one in the making about Windows in hospitals).

The story of Eric Lundgren was mentioned here many times in the past. The story was also widely covered in the mainstream media, including some of the very biggest names, the so-called journals of record. Smaller sites covered that in length, e.g. [1, 2].

We first became aware of Eric Lundgren’s situation before it made it into the media (any of it); people had told us about it. This year we’re going to revisit the story, which isn’t over yet. There is a lot to be learned from it and plenty worth showing. We’re going to do this in multiple installments and cite relevant material and sources as we go along.

Our coverage of the matter won’t be slanted or biased. We’ll stick to the underlying facts, which are in their own right pretty damning. It’s really hard to understand why a sane company would go through all this trouble. When dealing with Microsoft, however, sanity isn’t a factor. Insanity prevails and a schoolyard bully’s mentality/mindset guides the legal department.

“They actually went back and threatened to Sue everyone that wrote about me.. Like WAPO [Washington Post], HLN, FORBES, The Verge, LA TIMES, Etc.”
      –Eric Lundgren
Several years ago a friend of Eric Lundgren spoke to us right before the story broke. The Washington Post story had the most impact at the time. “I spent (1) year in Prison for distribution of freeware that was valued at $700,000,” Lundgren tells us. He recently got out of prison, having been sent there for a non-crime; as many explained at the time, the man deserves an award, not prison time. If anyone deserved time behind bars, it’s the people who fought hard to put him there. In his own words:

“I built the world’s longest range electric car and largest hybrid electronic recycling company,” he told us. “Stopped eWaste Burning in Ghana Africa w. Gov. and then US. Then the Gov. put me in prison [...] for distribution of freeware restore CD’s.”

We think it’s pretty amazing one can get jailed for doing something moral. As we recall it, Microsoft hired/assigned lots of PR people to try to cover up what Microsoft had done. It did not like and probably did not anticipate the generated negative publicity. Some of us know the case pretty well because it was discussed in IRC before it was even in the news.

“Microsoft did hire a bunch of PR,” Lundgren confirmed to us. “They actually went back and threatened to Sue everyone that wrote about me.. Like WAPO [Washington Post], HLN, FORBES, The Verge, LA TIMES, Etc.”

We should note that we’re quoting here an informal discussion, hence typed in a hurry. We’re certain Lundgren can express himself more clearly in a formal setting, but that’s not the point. At this stage, which is exploratory, we’re putting together some raw facts from one who was unjustly put behind bars. It was Microsoft that put him there; typical Microsoft…

“To be honest,” he told us, “I was just trying to get people free repair tools. Nothing was sold.”

“It was crazy,” he continued, “Microsoft flew a single witness from Ireland to my trial, the guy walks in – hands the judge a document that my lawyer and I could not see. When the judge was done reading it – he asked Microsoft what the value of a “Restore CD” is.. And Microsoft lied under oath.. They stated a “Restore CD” is worth $25.00/EA.”

“The judge didn’t understand the difference between a “Restore CD” and a “License”,” he complained, “and Microsoft convinced the judge that the “Restore CD” was of equal value and functionality to a new MSFT OS w. new license! I was honestly dumbfounded.. I kept waiting for someone to get it in court .. Instead – The judge threw out all of my expert witness’ testimony and only kept Microsoft’s testimony..”

I suggested or put forth the possibility that Microsoft played a role in selection of this judge in light of what we recently covered here. “If you can select the judge, you choose outcomes,” I told him.

“Very possible,” he replied. “My expert witness = Glenn Weadock – This guy wrote the book “Windows For Dummies” and trained MSFT employees for 16 years! [...] His testimony was thrown out – along with all my other expert witness’ [..] The Federal Judge in my case retired right after the case was over.. Then.. A few months later – MY LAWYER became the new federal judge in the same district.. Bruce Reinhart…”

Politics in the courtrooms aren’t unprecedented and we recently did a whole series about it (regarding EPO courts). One must not forget that Bill Gates’ father is the man behind a very powerful legal firm that is politically connected (we published many articles about that over the years).

Lundgren was sort of tricked if not blackmailed. It was the old trick of plea ‘bargain’ that was leveraged against him. “They threatened me with 47 Years in Prison,” he told us. “So my only choice was to plea-bargain.. I told them I would ONLY plead guilty to “Restore CD Without License” but then Microsoft convinced the judge to value a Restore CD at the SAME VALUE as a Full Microsoft OS w. License!”

If there’s a ‘new’ Microsoft, it’s not a very good one. It’s not a gentle one, either. They like to pretend it’s a charity now, the Gates Foundation.

“Microsoft has written in Print things that are 100% NOT TRUE about me,” Lundgren said. “How do I address this? Their “Slander/Libel Campaign” against me just makes me sick.”

There’s no easy way to tackle this in a corporate world or a world dominated, from top to bottom, by corporate power. In fact, they can get away with it (slandering people), knowing they have deeper pockets and more connections.

“At one point,” Lundgren explained, “they accused me of making computers susceptible to virus & hacking.. They also said I was trying to Decieve people.. None of this was true, it was their original free restore CD software and it was NOT changed in any way.. Same software anyone can Download online for FREE at the time.. I was just trying to help people that didn’t know how to download and I wasn’t trying to deceive anyone. I actually lost money on this.. and went to PRISON!”

This whole affair was proof or evidence of what Microsoft really is. Microsoft was eager to mothball reporting on it because it’s all about perceptions to them.

“I am a big fan of RightToRepair & iFixIT,” Lundgren explained. “They help me keep electronics working, in use, and out of our landfills!”

Microsoft recently got mentioned in the media for fighting the right to repair. “Electronic Waste represents 70% of the Toxic material in our landfills leaching into our water & food,” Lundgren continued. “Being burnt overseas.. We need to stop throwing this stuff away! [...] It’s time to fix the eWaste epidemic once and for all! Honestly.. If they want to stop me from Recycling – The’ll have to kill me! It’s not that they are anti-recycling.. It’s all about the $$$ with them. Consumers must waste for their profit to increase… Society must USE and TOSS.”

He mentioned Planned Obsolescence. “I just want them to leave recyclers & repair shops alone.. and customers! [...] If what I went through is able to spark the debate & promote change then it was worth it… I wouldn’t wish Prison on my worst enemy.. It’s just endless pointless suffering. ”

“They made my life hell,” he partly joked, but I told him that they bully everyone, still. In 2019 they still shake down companies using patents because they distribute Linux (Foxconn). “Foxconn has deeper pockets than yours,” I told him, and “we recently showed several stories on how they try to cause people to lose their job, mine included…”

Fyodor Dostoevsky once said: “The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons.”

A society that arrests recyclers doesn’t look too good.

As Lundgren put it: “Let’s help people control their own tech! In all seriousness – we are recycling 43 Million LBS of eWaste every year. Next – we will open recycling centers for EV Batteries worldwide. I truly live for recycling! We are all about re-using the parts and components in new applications to serve multiple life-cycles.

“When I am done Recycling Computers – I want to start a company to help Recycle-Lives. These people in Prison need direction & opportunity as to lower the recidivism rate.. It’s crazy that the recidivism rate is 68% within the first (3) years! Honestly – PRISONS ARE THE SOCIAL EQUIVALENT OF OUR LANDFILLS. As a Recycler – I believe there is value in everything.. I believe even Microsoft can be recycled into something good.”

“Microsoft is morality’s landfill,” I told him, “you assume goodwill [but] Microsoft belongs out of business. I keep having to explain to people they're very unique… not many companies would do this.”

To quote former Netscape Chairman James H. Clark: “Microsoft is, I think, fundamentally an evil company.”

How many companies out there would do things like these?

He said: “The company is made up of people.. People that answer to bosses whom answer to the CEO whom answers to Shareholders whom care about Stock Prices, Influence & Mitigating Risk.. Those Share-Holders are willing to turn a blind-eye to those in charge whom are able to make decisions that are good for MSFT although potentially bad for humanity..”

But Bill Gates controls the company and he is a longtime sociopath. Paul Allen (co-founder), who recently died, was a patent troll; the company is all rot and a fish rots from the head down.

07.24.19

Understanding Users and the Three Kinds of Computers: New, Slow and Broken

Posted in GNU/Linux, Hardware, Microsoft at 11:27 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Article by figosdev

Man recycling

Summary: “Fighting E-waste is good for the environment as well as people in conflict-mineral-related regions like the Congo– so if they seem like the kind of person who cares about that, be sure to mention that this is likely to keep more toxins out of landfills for longer”

There’s no accurate generalisation for every computer user. Some are savvy, many others aren’t. Most are conditioned by marketing.

Getting past that conditioning is not usually possible with mere debate or logic. Conditioning is emotional and experiential, and if you disagree you’re just missing the point. At least, that’s how it goes trying to explain things.

Understanding the user is the first step towards a practical response to peculiar misconceptions. Many of us know that the difference between a “New” and “Broken” machine, is that something needs to be fixed (and that thing is often just the software installation or configuration.) The difference between a New machine and a slow one, is often also a matter of software installation or configuration.

The user has plenty of reasons to be paranoid– instead of being granted access to their computer, they have companies like Microsoft and Apple as intermediaries. The big name tech brands are like the Church in the dark ages, obscuring their teachings in Latin and offering a proprietary (priest-driven) service to make things accessible to the congregation.

When people begin to learn how to do things for themselves, everything familiar is moved around and the cycle begins again. When you’re being led, but you don’t know how or why, a paranoid feeling is bound to result.

Proprietary software is a system of collective punishment– people are taught not to mess with anything, because then it will “break” and have to be “repaired.” Messing with things is generally fine– it’s your computer– but since you are conditioned not to worry about any of that as long as it’s “working” (“You don’t need to ask so many questions, just have faith, the Cloud will provide…”) tampering with the sacred relics will bring down wrath and harsh consequence.

Don’t install anything, or else– don’t remove anything, or else– It’s not your computer, it belongs to the software vendors.

If it were yours, advice would centre around means of practical management, not “leaving it alone or it will break.”

There are two reasons that it matters not to break anything– one is time. You shouldn’t fiddle with production machines, that’s true for any platform. But the other reason, is that proprietary software (and software that takes too many pages from proprietary design books) limits what can be fixed. And the constant dragging of people from one set of features to the next limits the effectiveness of education and familiarity. Users are the hostages of developers, and they panic like hostages and experience signs of Stockholm Syndrome like hostages:

“Don’t touch that! You don’t know what it’ll do!”

“But it just…”

“NO! Please! Last time someone did that it never worked right again.”

“Okay, okay. I’m closing the Run window, it’s alright.”

“It’s probably too late, just don’t touch it, okay?”

If schools were actually teaching technology instead of having corporations spoon-feed it to them, users would not be this hysterical over the use of standard features. There is a serious lack of computer literacy, even among college graduates of working age and accomplished careers.

But until we solve the computer literacy problem (and I recommend we try) it is still a good thing to get people to use free software. That’s the only way they will become familiar with it.

Lots of people have their own ideas about what friendly is. I’ve never required anything fancier or simpler than LXDE– I mean required for other people. This is not an endorsement of LXDE, so much as a reality check for people that think you must have something that is more or less elaborate for the “average user.” LXDE isn’t the nicest desktop you can possibly find, nor is it the lightest or the simplest. What it is, is just fine. It’s average. I’ve found it to be pretty reliable– but it’s just an example.

In homeless shelters, homes of people who are retired or on disability, on computers given to nieces and used in education, Debian Wheezy worked very well indeed. The secret to getting people to use it (in my experience) isn’t about what you do after the computer is given to someone– though I did offer free support– it’s about the psychological conditions under which the computer is donated.

Your experience may differ, and I’d like to hear from you about that. But I spent years looking for ideal ways to share free software, and this is my experience:

There are three kinds of computers– New, Slow and Broken.

With notable exceptions, if someone has a Slow computer and you put GNU/Linux on it, it’s now Broken. It doesn’t matter if you changed a single option– Breaking a computer is like dropping a teacup. You can glue it back together, but it will never be the same.

Yes, we know better. Yes, we can explain. It doesn’t matter– once you break it, the user themselves know for certain the computer will never be the same again. It’s not bad enough to replace it with a New computer, but even if it’s just an option you put right back afterwards– now it’s irreparably changed in some annoying way. Thank you, and get out.

Most people don’t want an operating system installed on their computer. And to some of us this is obvious. But even if you take a Slow computer someone doesn’t use anymore and doesn’t care about, “Sure kid, have fun– but if you break it, don’t bother me with it. I’ve got no use for a broken computer. Just leave it there, thank you, and get out… Darned kids, no respect for the work that goes into buying these things, they just want to break things and get new stuff.”

Of course there are exceptions. I found an office machine that seemed to be on its last legs, showed them what it would be like after “fixing it” with a live CD, and walked them through the things it wouldn’t be able to do after being “fixed.” It had a wired network connection, it was mostly used for online tasks, It wasn’t used for writing documents or printing. All they cared about was that it “worked” again. I installed Debian Wheezy and after using it they ran out and hugged me– “it’s SO MUCH FASTER!” So that won’t usually happen, though it does sometimes.

Things aren’t just Broken when you mess with them. The rule applies to machines that were already broken when you found them. If you mess with a computer that is already broken, “you’ll only make it worse.” Messing with a computer is how it breaks, broken computers and broken teacups are never the same again, if you mess with it further then you’ll only make it worse– why bother? Just “leave it alone” and buy a new one when you can.

The summary of this mindset is that doing almost anything with a computer will break it– and fixing it will break it more. This is the mindset of a hostage, not an owner, and it is the result of years of conditioning that is unmitigated by a proper computer education. Teachers have problems like these, so it should be no surprise that their students also feel helpless. They are prime candidates for service contracts, insurance plans and extended warranties, and that’s basically the idea.

Reality aside, in the psychology of the average computer user, even if they are really a lot smarter than this– this mindset is as much about emotional manipulation as the intelligence of the average user (quite a few average users are really a lot smarter than this, and they deserve credit where credit is due) a reasonable conclusion is that you can’t do much of anything to get past the mentality of the user. Not with their computers, that is.

The way I found to make “Slow” and “Broken” computers into New ones, simply involves a machine that is “New” (or like New) to the person receiving it.

Go to the person with a “Slow” or “Broken” computer, and find out if they have already replaced it with a New one. If they have, they are still trying to figure out what to do with it. After all, it will never be the same, so let it sit there. But it’s too expensive to throw away!

You won’t change their mind about whether it’s fixable, but just for the sake of honesty, tell them that you fix Slow and Broken computers, and that you give them away to people who need one.

Fighting E-waste is good for the environment as well as people in conflict-mineral-related regions like the Congo– so if they seem like the kind of person who cares about that, be sure to mention that this is likely to keep more toxins out of landfills for longer. Either way, you’re helping people.

Some will have concerns about data– you should learn how to securely wipe a drive so that you can tell them not to worry. In other situations, be ready to remove the drive on-site so that you can offer to leave that part with them “just to be sure.” You will find other drives, and the computer you get without one might have nicer specs than the other one you take a drive from.

Tell them “There’s a good chance I can fix this– if I do, do you want it back?” If they say yes, and you make it clear what you’re going to do– you can give it back to them with GNU/Linux installed. More often, they prefer to get rid of it and never get it back. It’s always going to be broken, they have a new one, etc.

Now with your New computer (by no means is anyone suggesting you say it’s newer than it is– it is now refurbished and offered as a “like new”, but used machine) wait until you meet a person who has a Slow or Broken computer.

Offer to LOAN them your Like New machine.

“I have a perfectly good laptop/desktop, would you like to borrow or own it free of charge?”

“What?”

“I can loan it to you, and if you like it you can keep it.”

“Why?”

“That’s something I do– I refurbish computers that I get for free, and give them away to people who need one. But you can just borrow it, if you want to try it. You can keep it if you like it.”

Some of them will get a free, Like New computer. If they don’t like it, you get it back and can refurbish it again.

Having tried the other ways, this is what I’ve found to be the most reliable way to spread GNU/Linux to everyday people. I’m not the first person to do it, but I tried sharing CDs and DVDs and USBs and offered to install, run Live, Dual boot, all of those.

The best media for distributing GNU/Linux is the computer itself. That’s how people expect to get computers– and anything else is “broken” and will never be the same– too often, anyway.

Be sure that if you do this, you are able to provide a reasonable (for them, for you) level of support to the people you give machines to. If they take that thing into an office store, they’re probably just going to tell them “it needs Windows installed. It’s old, you probably want to buy a New one.”

One option is to tell them that if they have serious problems with it, you’ll let them know when a new one is available.

Happy Refurbishing!

Licence: Creative Commons CC0 1.0 (public domain)

11.25.18

Motorola Solutions v Hytera (Hardware Patents) Again Shows That Only Lawyers Are Winning in Major Patent Battles

Posted in Hardware, Patents at 12:48 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Back in summer (regarding Hytera): Patents on Steroids: ITC is Rushing Embargoes Before the Facts Are Even Known

Hytera

Summary: High-level and large-scale patent disputes (which could probably be resolved or at least settled without lawsuits) are another reminder of the downsides of over-relying on patent lawyers, whose most expensive (profitable to themselves) product is lawsuits

“The U.S. International Trade Commission has shielded Hytera Communications Corp. Ltd.’s line of redesigned two-way radio systems from import restrictions, but maintained a trade block on the original design,” Suzanne Monyak said about the latest twist in Motorola‘s battle at the ITC, based on questionable old patents granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). We recently mentioned again the Hytera case (Motorola tries hard to control the narrative); lawyers want to be seen as winners regardless (legal bills), so as one site put it some days ago, “Motorola Solutions and Hytera both claim victory in USITC patent dispute” (it’s a half ‘win’ for both, half ‘loss’ as well). To quote:

Both Hytera and Motorola Solutions have claimed a victory in a patent dispute over digital mobile radio products.

Motorola Solutions filed a complaint against Hytera at the US International Trade Commission (USITC) accusing it of infringing seven Motorola patents.

Hytera filed a petition requesting a review of a final initial determination on the matter.

Previously, Hytera vice president, Tom Wineland, said he was confident that the company had not infringed any of Motorola Solutions’ patents.

However, in its ruling, the USITC determined that Hytera had infringed Motorola Solutions’ patents, and issued a limited exclusion order on any infringing two-way radio products, as well as cease and desist orders.

The USITC also rejected Hytera’s request to allow infringing products into the US to repair and/or replace those already in the country.

Hardware-based things cannot be tackled by 35 U.S.C. § 101. This case will go on and will be making more money for lawyers.

In Europe (carmakers) there’s also this lawsuit over 18 patents of Broadcom (we last mentioned the lawsuit last week). Here are some details about the outcome, basically a settlement (was litigation necessary at all?):

In fact, according to the source, a court trial slated for Friday has been called off. However, both the companies refrained from making any official statements.

Broadcom had reportedly claimed €1 billion (approximately $1.1 billion) earlier this month from Volkswagen for the unauthorized use of its 18 patents. The company had also threatened the automaker to judicially demand prohibition on production of notable Volkswagen models, including select models of Porsche and Audi, per the reports.

The automaker is alleged to have infringed upon patents concerning Broadcom’s semiconductors, Volkswagen leverages for its entertainment and navigation system in select car models.

We note that this is not the first time that Broadcom charged an automaker over patent infringement. In May 2018, the semiconductor company alleged Japan-based Toyota Motor (TM – Free Report) with infringement charges of six infotainment system patents between 2005 and 2014.

[...]

As of Oct 29, 2017, Broadcom had 24,250 patents, with expiration dates ranging from 2018 to 2036. Further, aggressive acquisition policy favors Broadcom with patent wins.

Notably, in the third-quarter of fiscal 2018, Broadcom reported Industrial & other (5% of total revenues) of $225 million, declining 5% year over year. The decline can primarily be attributed to decrease in Intellectual Property (IP) licensing revenues.

After months of litigation (money down the drain) they agreed to no longer pursue this case any further; whose idea was this litigious approach? Probably lawyers’. This is how they justify their job inside or outside those large firms.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

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 Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts