07.15.11
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Patents at 11:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
What Google needs is disruption, not compliance and conformity
Summary: Google’s newly-found sources of cash should be used to remove software patents rather than make the whole system more toxic for everyone
GOOGLE has just announced that it activates over 550,000 Android devices per day. This pace keeps increasing at an amazing rate and Google’s stock has just jumped through the roof, so it’s easy to see why Microsoft and Apple are nervous. We’re now at a crucial crossroad where Google can either decide to abolish software patents (to the degree possible, and possibly by liaising with others) or start getting “evil” by jumping on the patents treadmill, aka the Patents Cartel (because that’s what it is — a cartel). Apple bounced on this bandwagon a very long time ago and Microsoft only did so years ago. While some prefer tackling this serious issue with satire, others give us less humouring reports that indicate Google is replacing programmers with lawyers, or at least substituting growth priorities. This one article sheds light on the impact of patent lawyers inside Google. As we pointed out before — even years ago — it’s an insidious transformation which put patents supporters at the heart of a company better known for its engineering. This is harming innovation and raising the cost of products everyone buys. We really ought to pressure Google to do the right thing as it will be increasingly tempted to shut the public out; that’s what the lawyers Google is hiring would want. To necessitate their job they need to ensure Google dives deep inside the patent pools.
“We really ought to pressure Google to do the right thing as it will be increasingly tempted to shut the public out; that’s what the lawyers Google is hiring would want.”Microsoft and its patent trolls are suing and extorting for a living now (offence mode, with patents also going to Lodsys to innovatively attack apps with ‘More Apps’ links, owing to support from Microsoft’s former CTO), whereas Google claims to be after patents for “defensive” purposes. That’s what all companies that are winning call their patents. Well, the only defensive patent is one that self-destructs safely. Even Red Hat’s patents are a threat because Red Hat might be sold one day, so the “defensive patent” excuse is rather lame. We have repeatedly asked Red Hat to provide legal assurance for such circumstances, but our suggestions fell on deaf ears around Mr. Fontana (whose loyalty to clients comes before ideology).
By means of deterrence, any patent — whether offensive or not — is an impediment to innovation and a recent study helped show this. Even patent lawyers paid attention rather than ignore it. From Patently-O:
James Bessen, A Generation of Software Patents
Do patents benefit software firms? James Bessen examines this issue through both a survey of existing literature and a new empirical study. Bessen finds that although the number of software-related patents has grown rapidly over the past decade, the share of those patents obtained by software firms has remained relatively small, and is largely accounted for by the activity of a small number of large software firms. In other words, most software patents go to firms outside the software industry. Bessen also provides data that brings into question the value of patents to startup software firms and examines changes in the probability that a software patent will be involved in litigation during the first four years of its patent life.
Richard Waters, a longtime Microsoft apologist from the Financial Times, tries to dare Google into entering the patent wars (rather than abolishing those patents). For Google, any attempt to enter these wars would be foolish as it starts almost from 0. To provide some new numbers from this week’s news:
During the earnings call after Google announced their Q2 2011 earnings today, a question was asked about the patent issues surrounding Google right now. Specifically, Android is under assault from Oracle as well as Microsoft and Apple. This is happening because Google only has roughly 700 patents, and they recently lost a bid to gain Nortel’s 6,000+ patents — with those going to, who else, Microsoft and Apple, among others. So what is Google going to do?
We have urged Google many times before to just put back the money it makes from everyone into defending everyone. Google can help everyone by putting an end to software patents, or at least trying to. The public would participate.
“We have urged Google many times before to just put back the money it makes from everyone into defending everyone.”It is not too late for Google to reform the system and if it fails to do so things might get worse because Microsoft is likely going to send its mole in Nokia to attack Android phone makers (although not only Android is affected) after Nokia did this to Apple. Nokia and Apple are both part of the cartel, and both have been helping MPEG-LA. Watch what Apple is doing thanks to the incompetence of the USPTO: “Apple’s policy of trying to claim the patents for as many Android features as possible has continued with the blessing of the US Patent Office.
“Jobs’ Mob is unhappy that it is losing market share to Android and appears to be applying for as many patents as possible to patent troll the operating system out of the market.
“What is alarming is thanks to the vagaries of the US Patent system it appears to be getting away with it.
“Yesterday the US Patent and Trademark office gave Apple a patent which covers that nifty way that smartphones can turn from a portrait to a landscape by turning.”
“Losing Apple Wants To Ban Competitors,” says Muktware, which furthermore states that the “Court Questions Oracle’s Damage Reports” (Oracle is close to Apple, via the CEOs):
Software patent troll Microsoft’s PR machine is pumping as much mis-information as it can, oracling Oracle’s victory in Android court case. The reality is, Oracle is facing one after other set-backs in the case. After USPTO’s rejection of a majority of Oracle’s patents, the court refused to buy Iain Cockburn’s report and asked both parties (Google and Oracle) to name two experts to verify damages.
The reason Techrights can no longer concentrate on Novell and Microsoft in isolation is that there is a big problem behind all of these embodiments and to personify the problem made sense until some time last year when Oracle and Apple both attacked Android, showing their willingness to derail competition in truly nefarious ways. Google ought to know what the permanent solution will be; it’s not about winning a case here and there or even invalidating a patent here and there. Google needs to end all software patents in one fell swoop. The USPTO has lost the plot, as we shall show in a later post. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 5:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Un análisis de referencia, que se produce poco después de las noticias más importantes en materia de patentes de Nortel y el revés más reciente de Oracle.
OTRO día que pasa y el nivel de patentes FUD ha disminuido un poco, lo que es una buena noticia. Tom Krazit escribió este artículo[http://paidcontent.org/article/419-why-google-and-android-must-deal-with-the-mobile-protection-racket/] que nos perdimos hace unos días. Sugiere para Google el “Plan B-Es tal vez un poco exagerado llamar a esto un “plan”, pero Google está esencialmente abriendo sus brazos a la comunidad de propiedad intelectual, dispuesto a escuchar a casi todo el mundo con patentes de móviles para la venta o alquiler. Va a tener que conseguir la cobertura de patentes de alguna manera, y no parece importarle si eso es a través de una sola vez se refiere a las pequeñas empresas, las grandes adquisiciones, o acuerdos de licencia de patentes con sus enemigos. También tien la esperanza de que los reguladores federales van a modificar los términos del acuerdo, mientras que revisarlo, similar a la forma en la venta de patentes relacionadas con Novell fue alterado por el Departamento de Justicia por las quejas subsiguientes, y tiene un sueño que el Congreso puede dejar de jugar el pollo con el techo de endeudamiento y abrazar la reforma de patentes real.
“Los que realmente pagan por patentes de Nortel somos todos nosotros.”“Este es un verano decisivo para Android. Se levantó a la prominencia como el anti-iPhone, pero ha logrado unir a Apple, Microsoft y Research in Motion en un consorcio de competidores que están tratando de dar con Google en su punto más vulnerable.”
No es una gran pieza en absoluto, sino que se pone en el punto sobre aspectos anticompetitivos.
Los que realmente pagan por patentes de Nortel somos todos nosotros. Es sólo un impuesto mayor sobre todo, como se explica aquí[http://www.againstmonopoly.org/index.php?perm=72958000000000444]:
Los verdaderos perdedores aquí fueron a los consumidores que pagarán más por las cosas producidas bajo las patentes. También vamos a ver menos la competencia entre empresas y menos innovación. Esto afianza aún más la posición de pie ya mucho tiempo de los titulares, lo que también restringen la innovación.
¿Todavía pienso patentes promueven la innovación?
Compare esto con los sinverguenzas impulsores de Microsoft como Inna Fried que dicen cosas como “Microsoft podría hacer más de Licencias de Android que con Software” (otros refuerzos Microsoft va con el mismo punto de hablar en estos días). Para citar una observación precisa[http://allthingsd.com/20110708/microsofts-android-related-patent-moves-have-a-familiar-ring/?mod=googlenews]: “La semana pasada, Microsoft anunció cuatro acuerdos con fabricantes de dispositivos más pequeños Android Onkyo, Wistron, Velocity Micro y General Dynamics Itronix.
“Hay algunas diferencias entre el enfoque actual con Android y Microsoft tuvo un vis-à-vis Linux. Con Linux, Microsoft suele evitar tomar la ruta de los litigios.”
—Ina Fried
“Hay algunas diferencias entre el enfoque actual con Android y Microsoft tuvo un vis-à-vis Linux. Con Linux, Microsoft suele evitar tomar la ruta de los litigios. No fue hasta años después de su inicio de licencias Linux que presentó su primera demanda contra Linux de reclamos relacionados -. Una demanda contra el fabricante de GPS TomTom que se resolvió rápidamente ”
Sí, esto es muy cierto, pero Fried esta en la camita con Microsoft desde hace varios años en CNET, da una plataforma a los chantajistas de patentes de Microsoft y justifica estos actos abusivos. Fried deben estar completamente avergonzado de ello.
Empresas como Novell se dieron por vencidos sin luchar[http://www.muktware.com/blogs/1731] o en el caso particular de Novell en realidad se acercó a Microsoft para un acuerdo. Así que en cierto sentido, la observación citada de Fried es la correcta. Basándose en los informes que hemos acumulado, Melco – No HTC – probablemente fue la primera empresa a la cueva a punta de pistola. Es difícil saber a ciencia cierta, sin embargo, debido a las NDAs.
Microsoft no es la única empresa en una posición de ofensa a Android y reconocemos que Oracle también tiene que ser visto. Sobre la base de más información de Groklaw, Google está haciendo[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110712132428349] bastante bien destrozar Oracle patentes y añade Pogson[http://mrpogson.com/2011/07/13/oracle-v-google-poised-to-become-very-interesting/]:
Si el movimiento de Google para incluir las nuevas defensas es aceptada, el caso de Oracle crece unos agujeros enormes será un jurado en apuros para pasar por alto. Si el movimiento de Google se niega, Google tendrá razón excelente para apelar una decisión negativa. No hay ninguna indicación aquí de que Google va a tomar el camino más fácil y resolver. Hay indicios de que las patentes de software tendrá otro clavo en su ataúd. Google tiene los recursos para encontrar la técnica y son expertos en la búsqueda.
La patente ’702 se trata de máquinas virtuales, algo que IBM ha estado trabajando desde la década de 1960 para dividir los recursos de la computadora central del Sistema 360. Recuerdo que la máquina con su walk-in compartimentos y parpadeando las luces incandescentes. Todo esto es anterior a UCSD p sistema de Java y por muchos años. IBM utiliza en la actualidad que la historia para vender sus soluciones virtuales a los clientes. Estoy seguro de que el juez podrá disfrutar de la lectura. Estoy seguro de que un juez justo va a querer toda la historia a ser contada en la corte.
Aquí está un nuevo informe sobre el tema[http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Oracle-defends-Java-patent-1277340.html] (de una fuente confiable). Se dice que la USPTO “provisionalmente rechazó, parcial o totalmente, cinco de los siete patentes de Java a través de cuya supuesta infracción Oracle ha tomado Google a los tribunales. Sin embargo, Oracle ha negado a aceptar este rechazo. En respuesta a la USPTO, el proveedor de software explica por qué cree que la previa referencia a “la técnica” no se aplica.”
Apple y Oracle están conectados a través de su CEO, Ellison y Jobs. Hemos escrito mucho sobre esto.
“Un bien las manos, pero sólo Steve Jobs puede utilizar dos”, se lee este titular[http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/07/one-finger-ok-only-steve-jobs-can-use-two-fingers]
En términos generales, Apple parece estar diciendo que si se utiliza más de un dedo para hacer algo en una pantalla táctil, usted está violando su propiedad intelectual.
Apple probablemente se trate de utilizar las patentes en contra de tabletas Android[http://techrights.org/2011/05/13/altitude-capital-partners-revisited/]. Qué vergüenza. █
Traducción hecha por Eduardo Landaveri, Administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 5:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Los rivales de Google, acusados de conspirar contra Android” ~ titular Forbes.com (esta semana)
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: A medida que el asalto de patentes contra Linux/Dalvik/Java (Android) es cada vez más intenso, se realizan llamadas a Google para dejarse de cojudeces y unirse al lado del público, aliándose con los que tratan de poner fin a todas las patentes de software.
MICROSOFT piensa que lo tiene todo resuelto. Promovió a Horacio, el mafioso de patentes clave, no hace mucho tiempo, mientras que Apple dice que han dejado ir a su jefe abogado de patentes[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/12/us-apple-hp-patent-idUSTRE76B0SF20110712] (tal vez se fue por su cuenta, pero no parece así[http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2388374,00.asp] porque IDG dice que “el abogado actual de Apple de patentes principal se informa, ha dejado a la empresa después de no poder bloquear a los fabricantes de Android de usar características similares a las del iPhone”).
Así que de todos modos, los cambios importantes en Apple son evidentes después fallar al tratar de hacer daño a Android con los ataques de patentes. HTC no se ha rendido (Apple va a volver a intentarlo[http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/hardware/apple-accuses-htc-of-patent-breach/articleshow/9206294.cms]) y Samsung dió un duro golpe a Apple después de la demanda impulsiva de Apple. La empresa de marca, Apple, no del todo puede llegar a transformarse en una compañía de extorsión. Microsoft tampoco puede, sin embargo, a pesar de que lo ha intentado desde 2006 (con Novell). El “progreso” de Microsoft implica sobre todo las pequeñas empresas que a nadie le importa qué pasa con ellas o no, no puede contra Red Hat e incluso Canónical. Aquí vemos la molestia llamada Tuxera encontrar otro lugar para poner los impuestos de patentes de Microsoft[http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/rockchip-selects-tuxera-ntfs-exfat-file-system-interoperability-tablets-phones-webtv-1537045.htm], pero una vez más, quién ha oído hablar de Rockchip? Wikipedia aún apenas lo menciona[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockchip]. Como ya hemos explicado hace poco, cuando los ataques de Microsoft contra una empresa mediana o grande, se enfrenta a una respuesta, así que ahora sólo juega a lo “seguro” al atacar a sólo a los débiles en el patio de la escuela. Eso es sólo el juego de Microsoft. Patético. ¿Por qué Microsoft no demanda a Google y ver sus patentes invalidadas, una por una, de la misma manera que Oracle lo hace? Sólo veamos lo último de Groklaw:
* Oracle v. Google – La Corte Duda del Informe de Daños de Oracle[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110710090010182]
Juez Alsup claramente cree que el informe de daños de Oracle presentado por el profesor Iain Cockburn no ha proporcionado una base sólida para aplicar el “valor de todo el mercado” de la teoría de los daños y perjuicios. Entonces, ¿qué es la teoría del “mercado total” de daños y perjuicios?
* Oracle v. Google – Google Mueve su Complementaria Defensas de Invalidez[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110712074100640]
En otro caso, la construcción de la corte reclamo abierto de la técnica previa que no se podía utilizar antes (véase la sección. Un argumento en el movimiento). En su búsqueda, obviamente, muy profunda de las técnicas previas, Google también encuentra referencias que dice demostrar evidencia. (Vea las secciones E, G y H en discusión en el movimiento) en una cuarta instancia Google dice que JavaOS Oracle es en sí misma de la técnica anterior, y se JavaOS a disposición del público durante más de un año antes de la patente afirmó.
“Google recientemente realizado una oferta muy grande por las patentes de Nortel”, nos escribió un lector de esta mañana. “Lo que Google puede hacer con el USD aproximadamente $ 4B que habría utilizado para las patentes de Nortel sería saltar a la política de EE.UU. de cabeza y luchar para que se prohibieran de nuevo las patentes de software. Hay varias opciones que van desde la financiación de las campañas directas (debido a la nueva normativa) o de cabildeo normal.
“Una ley como esta en última instancia, ahorraría a Google más de lo que lo hace por luchar cada caso por separado. Hay un número creciente de “entidades no productivas”, como se refieren a menudo a los trolls de patentes, y luchar contra ellos de uno en uno o de patente a patente, no va a ayudar a nadie, excepto a los abogados de patentes. En el ejemplo de Android, que se puede pedir más bien pequeñas sumas por teléfono, pero 5 o 10 dólares multiplicado varias veces rápidamente el precio de los dispositivos del mercado. Lo mejor es centrarse en el corazón del problema y después de ir directamente a la cuestión de patentabilidad “.
Techrights hizo una sugerencia similar ayer[http://techrights.org/2011/07/12/ending-of-software-patents-and-goog/]. La Star tiene este nuevo artículo[http://www.thestar.com/business/companies/google/article/1021236--google-left-searching-for-patent-ammunition-after-nortel-loss], que dice:
La pérdida de Google en las licitaciones para $ 4.5 mil millones (EE.UU.) por la cartera de patentes de Nortel Networks Corp. la semana pasada significa que la compañía de búsqueda de Internet busca comprar otros inventos para construir un baluarte en contra de demandas dirigidas a su sistema Android, dicen los agentes de patentes.
“Hay un montón de carteras fenomenal para la venta”, dijo Dean Becker, director ejecutivo de corretaje ICAP patente en Palm Beach, Florida, la mayor compañía de venta de patentes. “Todas las empresas que operan en el mercado debido a los gastos, la distracción y el riesgo potencial financiero de los litigios de patentes.”
Hace unos días hemos observado que los reguladores de Canadá[http://techrights.org/2011/07/07/christian-paradis-on-nortel-sale/] y EE.UU.[http://techrights.org/2011/07/10/usdoj-vs-nortel-swpats-sale/] podrian potencialmente intervenir, pero después de un avance desafortunado[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-11/nortel-says-main-objections-to-4-5-billion-patent-sale-resolved.html] y luego la autorización de la venta [1[http://www.mobiledia.com/news/97774.html], 2[http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/07/11/nortel-approval-patent-sale.html], 3[http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Nortel-patent-sale-approved-1277688.html]] nos queda suponer que el gobierno una vez más furtivamente está con las empresas y no con los intereses públicos . Los tribunales dan el visto bueno[http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/07/11/idINIndia-58203020110711]:
Apple Inc (AAPL.O), Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O), Research in Motion Ltd (RIM.TO) y otras tres compañías de tecnología líderes han recibido la aprobación de la corte el lunes para comprar patentes inalámbricas de bancarrota Nortel Networks por US $ 4.5 billones.
Los jueces de los Estados Unidos y Canadá aprobarón la venta de 6.000 patentes y solicitudes, que se vendió tres veces lo que esperaban algunos analistas de la subasta de cuatro días en junio.
Nortel Networks Corp (NRTLQ.PK) se declaró en bancarrota de los acreedores en enero de 2009 y los tribunales en los dos países la supervisión de la enajenación de activos de la compañía como los vientos gigante ex telecomunicaciones de sus operaciones.
Jack Wallen, dice que “el matón Microsoft está de vuelta[http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/the-microsoft-bully-is-back/2693]” en su nueva columna:
El matón Microsoft está de vuelta
[...]
Bueno, el color me sorprendió que el tirano conocido como Microsoft ha tratado de hacer todo lo posible para socavar a la competencia – no importa cuál sea el costo, lo que está en juego, o lo que la percepción del público en general. Este es el trato: En abril, Microsoft llegó a un acuerdo con Samsung en el que Samsung pagaría el gigante del software una suma no revelada para todos los teléfonos Samsung vendió – Get This – impulsado por el sistema operativo Android. Así es, MS hizo las afirmaciones habituales que Android (junto con todas las empresas en el planeta – independientemente de lo que producen) infringido patentes de Microsoft. ¿Revelarían las patentes infringidas? Por supuesto que no. Después de todo, ha sido el modus operandi de Microsoft durante décadas para ocultar la verdad por miedo a parecer como un niño mimado de tomar sus juguetes y volver a casa.
Por lo que respecta al público (el público que se preocupaba por Samsung y Android) se ha preguntando cuál es la cantidad y las patentes fueron. Bueno, ahora sabemos que Samsung paga la friolera de $ 15,00 por teléfono basado en Android vendido. Vamos a hacer que las matemáticas:
Samsung vendió 19 millones de teléfonos basados en Android en el segundo trimestre de 2011. A los 15 Smackers cada uno, que equivale a $ 285 millones de dólares.
“El FUD (Miedo, Incertidumbre y Duda) llega a ser mucho peor”, afirma Jonathan Angel[http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Rockstar-Bidco-LP-purchase-approved-while-Oracle-trial-may-be-delayed/?kc=rss] en Linux para dispositivos (eWEEK). Citando a las partes pertinentes: “En lo que somos conscientes, no ha habido ninguna explicación pública de las patentes de Microsoft que infringen los dispositivos Android. Tampoco está claro si, en última instancia, será posible para cualquier fabricante para crear un dispositivos Android sin tener que pagar un diezmo a Redmond.
“Lo que sí sabemos es que el FUD se ha vuelto mucho peor. Como ya informamos la semana pasada, Microsoft se unió a Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Research in Motion (RIM), y Sony en un consorcio denominado Rockstar Bidco LP – que logró ganar más de 6.000 patentes de Nortel Networks y solicitudes de patentes en una subasta de bancarrota. La oferta de $ 4,5 mil millones Rockstar superó a la propia Google, que podría haber comprado algún tipo de protección para Android, por más de $ 1 mil millones. ”
“Los rivales de Google, acusados de conspirar contra el Android”, dice este titular de blogs Forbes Magazine[http://blogs.forbes.com/mobiledia/2011/07/11/googles-rivals-accused-of-colluding-against-android/]:
El Instituto Americano de Defensa de la Competencia está pidiendo a los reguladores para investigar la venta de patentes de Nortel, lo que sugiere la oferta ganadora de los más grandes rivales de Google puede implicar colusión en contra de Android.
El grupo que se autodenomina Rockstar Bidco, que incluyen Apple, Microsoft y Research in Motion, compró tesoro de Nortel de las patentes por $ 4,5 mil millones, posiblemente la mayor subasta de la propiedad intelectual de todos los tiempos. La venta de inmediato expresó su preocupación de los defensores de defensa de la competencia, ya que los miembros de la coalición, sobre todo los rivales de Google, podrá utilizar las patentes para atacar el sistema operativo Android de Google.
Algunos bloggers menos conocidos de CNET hicieron lo correcto[http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20078710-266/android-users-dont-fret-over-googles-fee-battles/] por un cambio por ir con un título más pacificador, “los usuarios de Android: No se preocupe por las batallas cuota de Google” (que es una defensa en principio).
Los fabricantes de móviles con el Android de Google sistema operativo para móviles puede ser sancionado con cuotas de licencia adicionales si Oracle y Microsoft con la suya. Pero, ¿qué podría significar eso para el consumidor medio de teléfonos celulares? ¿El precio de los dispositivos Android subirían?
No es probable, dicen los expertos. Hay varias razones para pensar que las victorias legales de Oracle o Microsoft haría poco para mover la aguja en términos de precios para los consumidores. Es más, cualquier costo adicional puede ser añadido al teléfono probablemente sería compensado por el ahorro en otros lugares, aún garantizando que los fabricantes de teléfonos que generen márgenes decente en estos productos, el costo de hacer ellos también va hacia abajo.
No hay ninguna razón para asumir los mayores costos por el momento. Escribimos acerca de esto ayer[http://techrights.org/2011/07/12/idg-spin/]. Es parte de la campaña de FUD que los enemigos Android como Microsoft están coordinando.
Chris DiBona de Google dio una buena entrevista de ayer y que es ampliamente citado por decir que Android es una realización del sueño de Linux ([1] – [3] a continuación). Google, de hecho, acaba de publicar un código con licencia GPL (Licencia Pública General) para su última versión de Android, aunque no todos de la misma ([4] – [5] a continuación). Porque habría que defender a Android y también atacar a las patentes de software, Microsoft y Apple, que cada vez intentan utilizar contra Linux porque es la única arma que a los gorilas les queda, a excepción de la comercialización y FUD. Si somos capaces de derrotar a las patentes de software, espero que con el apoyo de Google, Linux definitivamente va a ganar. Damos la dirección de DiBona (cdibona@google.com) con la esperanza de que la gente pueda escribir en él cortésmente como era su costumbre responder a mensajes de correo electrónico. Esperemos que los idiotas comunicados de prensa como este nuevo que dice: “[H]emos ha presentado recientemente una patente de software emocionante nueva” llegará a su fin. La economía de EE.UU. tiene suficientes problemas, incluso sin los carteles de la patente. Cada patente presentada sólo empeora las cosas, aunque no a aquellos que ven los carteles de lo más inclusivo e ignoran las externalidades. Google debe luchar contra los cárteles de patentes, no encontrar una manera de comprar una membresía en ellas (con las adquisiciones de varias patentes). █
1. Google: “Android es el sueño hecho realidad del escritorio de Linux”[http://derstandard.at/1308186313932/Interview-Google-Android-is-the-Linux-desktop-dream-come-true]
Chris DiBona, jefe de Open Source de Google inicia conversaciones sobre el papel de Linux en la empresa y por qué Chrome y Android utilizan modelos de liberación de manera fundamentalmente diferentes.
Desde un inicio el código abierto ha estado jugando un papel importante en Google. Hoy en día se usa casi “todas partes” dentro de la empresa. Desde el servidor a los escritorios de ingeniería y los teléfonos inteligentes como Chris DiBona, Googles “Administrador de código abierto”, señala en una entrevista con derStandard.at. Él va a hablar acerca de Android como el “sueño hecho realidad de escritorio Linux”, y explica por qué el modelo de lanzamiento de Chrome y Android son tan radicalmente diferentes.
2. Gerente de Google de Código Abierto: Android es el Sueño de Linux Hecho Realidad[http://digitizor.com/2011/07/12/google-android-linux-dream/]
Con medio millón de dispositivos Android que se activan todos los días, no hay duda de que Android es uno de los sistemas operativos más populares hoy en día. No muchos usuarios se da cuenta de esto, pero Android está basado en Linux.
Android es sin duda el más popular de Linux, sistema operativo basado en el mundo. En una entrevista con el sitio web alemán derStandard.at, Chris DiBona, que es el Gerente de código abierto de Google, Android, ha dicho que es el sueño hecho realidad Linux.
3. Jefe del Código Abierto de Google Conversa abiertamente en Entrevista[http://ostatic.com/blog/googles-open-source-chief-talks-shop-in-interview]
4. GPL el Código Fuente de Android 3.2 disponible en AOSP[http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/6410b44798c19d61?pli=1]
5. Google no está publicando todo el código fuente de su última versión de su sistema operativo.[http://mobiputing.com/2011/07/open-source-portions-of-android-3-2-now-available/]
Traducción hecha por Eduardo Landaveri, Administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.14.11
Posted in Google at 3:02 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Google+ and Facebook need to be avoided for being proprietary software traps with understated dangers
GOOGLE PLUS has been spamming people in order to gain subscribers. Moreover, it has lied to the public in order to create an illusion of scarcity (invites) and in many ways it remains similar to Facebook. Both are proprietary and running on a LAMP stack. Suffice to say, the main advantage we see in having Google+ is that it increases competition and reminds people that just flipping over a boolean flag to indicate one of hundreds of millions is a ‘friend’ only applies to one of several (potentially many) databases.
Techrights does not typically deal with social science and the attention whores that flock to Facebook despite its many abuses.
We have been more interested in Facebbook’s bad business practices, which include AstroTurfing, lock-in, patent aggression, privacy violations, censorship, and much more.
Not so long ago we wrote about Facebook’s insult to Free software. We are seeing it again:
After just a few days of operation, Facebook has already slammed the door for Open-Xchange’s OX.IO export tool. According to Facebook, the app violates its terms of service — but the company says “we are not violating anything.”
So here’s the scoop: Last week, Open-Xchange (a company that provides an Exchange-compatible email and collaboration suite) launched OX.IO. The new service is supposed to help users consolidate contact data, and worked with Facebook, but also works with GMail, GMX.de, LinkedIn, Yahoo!, SugarCRM, and a few others.
Recall what Facebook did to products associated with KDE. The way it just blocked software for competitive reasons provides insight into the danger of relying on third-part platforms, including Google. It wasn’t long ago that Google withdrew APIs it implicitly promised to support.
As we wrote several months ago, the only ‘social network’ Techrights is willing to endorse is Identi.ca (accounts named here). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 2:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An analysis by reference, occurring shortly after the major news regarding Nortel’s patents and Oracle’s latest setback
ANOTHER day goes by and the level of patent FUD has decreased somewhat, which is good news. Tom Krazit wrote this article which we missed some days ago. He suggests for Google “Plan B—It’s perhaps a bit of a stretch to call this a “plan,” but Google is essentially throwing open its arms to the intellectual property community, willing to listen to just about anyone with mobile patents for sale or rent. It’s going to have to get patent coverage somehow, and it doesn’t seem to care if that’s through one-off deals with small companies, large acquisitions, or even patent licensing deals with its foes. It’s also hoping that federal regulators change the terms of the deal while they review it, similar to how a patent sale involving Novell was altered by the Department of Justice following complaints, and has a pipe dream that Congress may stop playing chicken with the debt ceiling and embrace real patent reform.
“Those who really pay for Nortel’s patent is all of us.”“This is a crucial summer for Android. It rose to prominence as the anti-iPhone, but has managed to unite Apple, Microsoft, and Research in Motion in a consortium of competitors who are trying to hit Google in its most vulnerable spot.”
It’s not a great piece at all, but it does get across the point about anti-competitive aspects.
Those who really pay for Nortel’s patent is all of us. It’s just a major tax on everything, as explained here:
The real losers here were us consumers who will pay more for things produced under the patents. We will also see less inter-company competition and less innovation. This further cements the already long standing position of the incumbents, which will also restrict innovation.
Still think patents promote innovation?
Compare that to shamelss Microsoft boosters like Ina Fried who say things like “Microsoft Could Make More From Android Licensing Than From Software” (other Microsoft boosters go with the same talking point these days). To quote an accurate observation: “This past week, Microsoft announced four deals with smaller Android device makers Onkyo, Wistron, Velocity Micro and General Dynamics Itronix.
“There are some differences between the current approach with Android and the one Microsoft took vis-à-vis Linux. With Linux, Microsoft generally avoided going the litigation route.”
–Ina Fried“There are some differences between the current approach with Android and the one Microsoft took vis-à-vis Linux. With Linux, Microsoft generally avoided going the litigation route. It wasn’t until years after it started licensing Linux that it filed its first suit involving Linux-related claims — a suit against GPS maker TomTom that was quickly settled.”
Yes, this is quite true, but Fried played along with Microsoft for several years in CNET, giving a platform to Microsoft’s patent racketeers and justifying these abusive actions. Fried should be utterly ashamed of it.
Companies like Novell were giving up without a fight or in Novell’s particular case actually approaching Microsoft for a deal. So in some sense, Fried’s quoted observation is correct. Based on reports we accumulated, Melco — not HTC — was probably the first company to cave at gunpoint. It is hard to tell for sure, however, due to NDAs.
Microsoft is not the only company in a position of offence against Android and we recognise that Oracle too needs to be watched. Based on more information from Groklaw, Google is doing quite alright trashing Oracle’s patents and Pogson adds:
If Google’s motion to include the new defences is accepted, Oracle’s case grows some huge holes a jury will be hard pressed to ignore. If Google’s motion is denied, Google will have excellent grounds to appeal a negative decision. There is no indication here that Google will take the easy way out and settle. There is indication that software patents will have another nail in their coffin. Google has the resources to find prior art and are experts at search.
The ’702 patent is about virtual machines, something IBM has been working with since the 1960s to divide up the resources of the System 360 mainframe. I remember that machine with its walk-in compartments and blinking incandescent lights. This all predated UCSD p system and Java by many years. IBM currently uses that history to sell its virtual solutions to customers. I am sure the judge will enjoy the reading. I am sure a fair judge will want the whole story to be told in court.
Here is one new report on the subject (from a trusted source). It says that the USPTO “has provisionally rejected, partially or in full, five of the seven Java patents over whose alleged infringement Oracle has taken Google to court. However, Oracle has refused to accept this rejection. In a response to the USPTO, the software vendor explains why it thinks that the reference to “prior art” does not apply.”
Apple and Oracle are connected through their CEOs, Ellison and Jobs. We wrote a lot about this.
“One Finger OK, But Only Steve Jobs Can Use Two,” reads this headline
Roughly speaking, Apple seems to be claiming that if you use more than one finger to do something on a touchscreen, you’re infringing on their intellectual property.
Apple will probably try to use such patents against Android tablets. For shame. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.13.11
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 3:05 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Google’s Rivals Accused of Colluding Against Android” ~Forbes.com headline (this week)
Summary: As the patent assault on Linux/Dalvik/Java (Android) becomes ever more intense, calls are made for Google to get its act together and join the side of the public, liaising with those seeking to put an end to all software patents
MICROSOFT THINKS it has got it all figured out. It promoted Horacio, the key patent racketeer, not so long ago, whereas Apple is said to have let its chief patent lawyer go (maybe he left on his own, but it does not seem so because IDG says that “Apple’s current chief patent lawyer is reportedly leaving the company after failing to block Android manufacturers from using iPhone-like features”).
So anyway, major changes at Apple are evident after failing to harm Android with the patent attacks. HTC has not surrendered (Apple is retrying) and Samsung dealt a major blow to Apple following Apple’s impulsive lawsuit. The branding company, Apple, cannot quite manage to transform into an extortion company. Neither can Microsoft though, as it has tried since 2006 (with Novell). Microsoft’s ‘progress’ mostly involves small companies that nobody cares about, not Red Hat or even Canonical. Here we see the nuisance called Tuxera finding another place to put some Microsoft patent tax, but again, who ever heard of Rockchip? Wikipedia barely even mentions it. As we explained recently, whenever Microsoft strikes against a medium- or large-sized company, it faces blowback, so now it just plays ‘safe’ by attacking the feeble ones in the school yard. That’s just Microsoft’s game. Pathetic. Why won’t Microsoft sue Google and see its patents invalidated one by one, jin the same way Oracle does? Just watch the latest from Groklaw:
-
Judge Alsup clearly believes the Oracle damages report provided by Prof. Iain Cockburn has failed to provide a basis for applying the “entire market value” theory of damages. So what is the “entire market” theory of damages?
-
In another instance, the court’s claim construction opened up prior art that was not usable before (see Sec. A under Argument in the Motion). In their obviously very thorough search for prior art, Google also found references that it says demonstrate obviousness. (See Sections E, G and H under Argument in the Motion) In a fourth instance Google says that Oracle’s JavaOS itself is prior art, and JavaOS was publicly available for more than a year prior to the asserted patent.
“Google recently made very large bids for the Nortel patents,” wrote to us a reader this morning. “What Google can do with the approximately $4B USD that they would have used for the Nortel patents would be to jump into US politics with both feet and get software patents banned again. There are several options ranging from direct campaign financing (due to new rules) or regular lobbying.
“Such a law would ultimately save Google more than it would do by fighting each case separately. There is an increasing number of “non-producing entities”, often referred to as patent trolls, and fighting them one at a time or one patent at a time isn’t going to help anyone except the patent lawyers. In the example of Android, they may ask for smallish sums per handset, but 5 or 10 dollars multiplied several times will quickly price the devices out of the market. Best to focus at the heart of the problem and go directly after the patentability question.”
Techrights made a similar suggestion yesterday. The Star has this new article which says:
Google’s loss in bidding for the $4.5 billion (U.S.) portfolio of Nortel Networks Corp. patents last week means the Internet-search company will be looking to buy other inventions to build a bulwark against lawsuits targeting its Android system, patent brokers say.
“There are a lot of phenomenal portfolios for sale,” said Dean Becker, chief executive officer of ICAP Patent Brokerage in Palm Beach, Fla., the world’s largest patent seller. “Every operating company is in the market because of the expense, distraction and the potential financial risk of patent litigation.”
Some days ago we noted that Canadian and US regulators were potentially stepping in, but after an unfortunate breakthrough and then authorisation of the sale [1, 2, 3] we are left assuming that the government once again sidles with corporations rather than with public interests. The courts give a go-ahead:
Apple Inc(AAPL.O), Microsoft Corp(MSFT.O), Research in Motion Ltd(RIM.TO) and three other leading tech companies received court approval on Monday to buy wireless patents from bankrupt Nortel Networks Corp for $4.5 billion.
Judges in the United States and Canada approved the sale of 6,000 patents and applications, which fetched three times what some analysts expected from the four-day auction in June.
Nortel Networks Corp (NRTLQ.PK) filed for bankruptcy protection from creditors in January 2009 and courts in the two countries are overseeing the disposal of the company’s assets as the former telecommunications giant winds down its operations.
Jack Wallen says that “the Microsoft bully is back” in his new column:
The Microsoft bully is back
[...]
Well, color me surprised that the tyrant known as Microsoft has taken to doing everything it can to chip away at the competition — no matter what the cost, what the stakes, or what the perception of the public at large. Here’s the deal: Back in April, Microsoft struck a deal with Samsung wherein Samsung would pay the software giant an undisclosed sum for every Samsung handset sold — get this — powered by the Android OS. That’s right, MS made it’s usual claims that Android (along with every company on the planet — regardless of what they produce) infringed upon patents held by Microsoft. Would they disclose the said infringed patents? Of course not. After all, it’s been Microsoft’s modus operandi for decades to obfuscate the real truth for fear of looking like a spoiled baby taking its toys and going home.
So there the public was (the public that cared about Samsung and Android) wondering what the sum and the patents were. Well, we now know that Samsung is to pay a whopping $15.00 per Android-based handset sold. Let’s do that math:
Samsung sold over 19 million Android-based handsets in the second quarter of 2011. At 15 smackers a pop, that equals $285 Million Dollars.
“The FUD gets a lot worse,” argues Jonathan Angel in Linux For Devices (eWEEK). Quoting the relevant parts: “As far as we’re aware, there has been no public explanation of what Microsoft patents Android devices infringe. Nor is it clear whether, ultimately, it will be possible for any manufacturer to create an Android devices without paying a tithe to Redmond.
“What we do know is that the FUD just got a lot worse. As we reported last week, Microsoft joined Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Research in Motion (RIM), and Sony in a consortium termed Rockstar Bidco LP — which successfully gained more than 6,000 Nortel Networks patents and patent applications at a bankruptcy auction. The $4.5 billion Rockstar bid beat out Google’s own, which could have purchased some protection for Android, by more than $1 billion.”
“Google’s Rivals Accused of Colluding Against Android,” says this headline from Forbes Magazine blogs:
The American Antitrust Institute is asking regulators to investigate Nortel’s patent sale, suggesting the winning bid to Google’s biggest rivals may imply collusion against Android.
The group calling itself Rockstar Bidco, which include Apple, Microsoft and Research in Motion, bought Nortel’s trove of patents for $4.5 billion, possibly the biggest intellectual property auction of all time. The sale immediately raised concern from antitrust advocates, since the members of the coalition, mainly Google’s rivals, may use the patents to attack Google’s Android operating system.
Some lesser-known blogger from CNET did the right thing for a change by going with a more pacifying title, “Android users: Don’t fret over Google’s fee battles” (that’s a defence in principle).
Handset makers using the Google Android mobile operating system may be slapped with additional licensing fees if Oracle and Microsoft have their way. But what might that mean for the average cell phone consumer? Would the price of Android devices go up?
It’s not likely, say experts. There are several reasons to think that legal victories from Oracle or Microsoft would do little to move the needle in terms of pricing for consumers. What’s more, whatever additional costs might be added to the phone would likely be offset by savings elsewhere, still guaranteeing that handset makers generate decent margins on these products as the cost of making them also goes down.
There is no reason to assume increased costs just yet. We wrote about this yesterday. It’s part of the FUD campaign which Android foes like Microsoft are coordinating.
Chris DiBona from Google gave a good interview yesterday and he is widely quoted for saying that Android is a realisation of the Linux dream ([1]-[3] below). Google has in fact just released some GPL-licensed code for the latest Android version, although not all of it ([4]-[5] below). We really ought to defend Android and also attack software patents, which Microsoft and Apple will increasingly try to use against Linux because it’s the only weapon these gorillas have left, except marketing and FUD. If we manage to defeat software patents, hopefully with Google’s support, Linux will definitely win. We gave DiBona’s address (cdibona@google.com) hoping that people can write to him politely as he usually replies to E-mails. Let’s hope that idiotic press releases like this new one which says “[w]e recently filed an exciting new software patent” will come to an end. The US economy has enough problems even without the patent cartels. Every patent filed only makes matters worse, although not to those who see the cartels as inclusive and ignore the externalities. Google must fight those cartels, not find a way to buy a membership (with massive patent acquisitions). █
-
Chris DiBona, Googles Open Source Boss talks about the role of Linux inside the company and why Chrome and Android use so fundamentally different release models
Right from the start Open Source has been playing an important role at Google. Nowadays it’s used nearly “everywhere” inside the company. From server to the engineering desktops and smartphones as Chris diBona, Googles “Open Source Manager” points out in an interview with derStandard.at. He goes on to talk about Android as the “Linux desktop dream come true” and explains why the release model of Chrome and Android are so fundamentally different.
-
With half a million Android devices being activated everyday, there is no doubt that Android is one of the most popular operating systems today. Not many users realizes this but Android is based on Linux.
Android is without any doubt the most popular Linux-based operating system in the world. In an interview with German website derStandard.at, Chris DiBona, who is the Open Source Manager at Google, has said that Android is the Linux dream come true.
-
-
-
Google is not releasing all the source code for the latest version of the operating system.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.12.11
Posted in Deception, FUD, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Patents at 1:40 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The anatomy of biased-by-design article or a deconstruction of IDG’s hostility towards Linux
IT IS NO secret that we distrust IDG, which recently ran a 30-day troll-athlon against Ubuntu. It’s just one recent example among many and it is hard to decide whether to ignore them or rebut them because regardless, Google, for instance, syndicates that as ‘news’, failing to distinguish between news and blogs (opinion). The same problem exists in ZDNet and to a lesser degree in CNET.
I was recently invited for an interview over at www.muktware.com, which is a new site bold enough to challenge the corporate press. This interview might be published here at a later date. The site also asked me for comments on a one-sided IDG piece which spreads FUD against Android, using software patents of course (Microsoft loves those as a form of FUD these days). Separately, wrote that site, the court suggests that Oracle won’t be getting its way in the case against Google. While Groklaw continues showing this with its sound analysis, the pro-Microsoft press conveniently ignores. It pays attention only to gloom-and-doom predictions, which pro-Microsoft lobbyists are constantly amplifying. To quote:
Software patent troll Microsoft’s PR machine is pumping as much mis-information as it can, oracling Oracle’s victory in Android court case. The reality is, Oracle is facing one after other set-backs in the case. After USPTO’s rejection of a majority of Oracle’s patents, the court refused to buy Iain Cockburn’s report and asked both parties (Google and Oracle) to name two experts to verify damanges.
My comments regarding the FUD from IDG’s Nancy are posted below in full (sorry if they are crude, short, and full of typos, I am still catching up after spending all day yesterday in London).
The author of the article is a Microsoft proponent, but I would not use personal angle to counter the hypothesis of the article, which is good for Microsoft. The story about Oracle’s demands has been exaggerated. Just because Oracle, the plaintiff, asks for X,
does not mean that Oracle will get X, even if it wins. Based on what we know, one by one Oracle’s (formerly Sun’s) patents fall into the can following re-examination. At Sun, proponent staff admitted they played a bit of a game trying to see who manages to get the most ridiculous patent application past the USPTO (i,.e. accepted as a monopoly). Nancy writes, “If Oracle wins the lawsuit that it brought against the software giant, the consequences for Google and the entire Android market could be dire, analysts say.” But which analysts did she ask? Has she asked those who are unfitting to her headline? Has she contacted Mark Webbink or Pamela Jones from Groklaw? The first person she mentions is a patent lawyer. Patent lawyers would love to see patents upheld and commissions paid to them. This is a case of self-fulfilling prophecies. The analyst with Deutsche Bank mentions Oracle’s desires, which are merely desires. SCO too had desires and all it got was bankruptcy
“Oracle declined comment on whether it is asking handset makers to license its technology and did not comment further for this story. Google did not reply to requests for comment.”
Nancy could not get those involved to comment. Instead, she relies on mere spectators
“That licensing cost would make using Android comparable to the cost of licensing Windows Phone 7, Goldberg said.”
Has Goldberg actually tried the platform? It’s not competitive, some would call it a joke. It did not even support cut and paste until recently. The number of sales of this platform (licences really) is just a few millions. Google activates that many in about a week. While making gloomy predications for Android and hailing Windows as the Only Other Choice {tm}, Nancy quotes just a couple of people, one of whom clearly has a patent agenda. There seems to be a missing side — one that has not been includes in the panel, so to speak. That same one-sided piece also closes with such a conclusion/quote which leads mysticism that cannot alleviate FUD
She quotes: “So the perception would be that Google lost. Oracle will probably insist on [confidentiality] to be able to keep this posture, whether it’s justified or not.”
No.
The real dilemma here. Is not whether it’s secret or not. It’s whether Google will win the case or not. They present a false choice. And then at the end, this writer who covered Microsoft for years gives the impression that she only covers phones.
“Nancy Gohring covers mobile phones and cloud computing for The IDG News”
She ought to tell readers what company she covered for a long time beforehand. Based in Seattle (near Microsoft), I also notice that her latest two tweets are messages to pro-Microsoft lobbyist, Mr Müller, who enjoys attacking all of Microsoft’s competition, esp. Android as of late.
If she is getting her information from lobbyists, then no wonder the reporting is so poor.
This whole article (link omitted on purpose, although one can find it based on quoted text) is not unusual, it’s characteristics of IDG’s spin zone. We need to continue pressuring IDG, which we previously called the Fox News of IT. IDG’s business model is attracting advertisers and clients for ‘reports’ (Linux does neither); it is not in the business of actually reporting accurately and the objective of articles (‘content’) is merely to attract crowds into the ads and make clients of IDC happy(ier). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 1:15 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Microsoft’s (and Apple’s) patent attack on Google/Android is not working
Summary: A look at the patent attacks from Microsoft and why they have not been as effective as Microsoft and its lobbyists wish us to believe (for FUD factor)
In a decent blog post from Christine Hall she explains that Microsoft has become a patent threat not just to Android. It had already signed deals like the one with Novell in order to create what Christine (of FOSS Force) calls the “Microsoft Tax on Linux Devices”. To quote:
The desktop and laptop might be safe, for the time being, but now the evil empire has dug its talons into the mobile world. It’s becoming nigh near impossible to purchase a device running Android or Chrome OS without a hidden Microsoft tax, and the makers of smartphones and tablets probably won’t be offering devices with no operating system installed in the near future, for those of us who’d prefer to install our own OS and skip having any of our money shipped to MS.
The new Microsoft tax is in the form of patent licenses that OEMs are being blackmailed into paying by the Microsoft folks. Yep, MS is finally making good on its promises to enforce the patents it claims are being violated by Linux by going after the makers of devices running Android (and now, evidently, Chrome OS). Does Microsoft actually hold valid patents being infringed by Android? Who knows? That would be for the courts to decide and, so far, nothing’s gone to court. OEMs are just ponying up and buying MS licenses on the strength of Microsoft threats. So much so that Redmond is evidently making more money on Android than on Windows Phone 7.
Here in this site we have been keeping an up-to-date list of companies that pay Ballmer for the ‘right’ to sell products with Linux. We urge people to avoid those companies and send out the message that taking this shameful route is unwise for business. Companies tend to consider what’s good for business, not what’s good for ethics, although poor ethics sometimes — provided public awareness — affect business.
Microsoft is clearly failing to sell its products, so when it cannot ram them down people’s throats (as it does by bribing colleges and offering kickbacks to OEMs) it will try to make money from the competition’s sales. If someone still believes that Microsoft is doing alright against Linux, share this this new article from a ‘news’ site paid by Microsoft. It quotes Microsoft’s CEO Steve Ballmer as saying that “In a year, we’ve gone from very small to [...] very small.”
Hilarious.
“Google’s Android operating system remains No. 1 in the U.S.,” notes the Microsoft-sympathetic reporter, “while Windows Phone lost ground, according to the latest comScore report. The Windows Phone 7 launch last fall has not stopped Android’s rise. Microsoft had almost 8 percent of the U.S. market in the past three months, down 1 percent…”
Mr. Pogson notes that among the big players that sell Android devices Microsoft has gotten just about nobody to pay for unnamed patents, except HTC. To quote:
The Open Handset Alliance has 20 members who make handsets: Acer, Alcatel, ASUS, CCI, Dell, FoxConn, Garmen, Haier, HTC, Huawei, Kyocera, Lenovo, LG, Motorola, NEC, Samsung, Sharp, Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and ZTE.
Several manufacturers using Android have entered licensing agreements with M$: Wistron, HTC, General Dynamics Itronix, Velocity Micro, and Onkyo. M$ is reported to be demanding $15 a copy for Android/Linux from Samsung and Barnes and Noble has gone to court over the issue. It is interesting that M$ has apparently secured royalty payments around $5 per copy while demanding $15. Thus it seems that some are paying M$ to go away. Others will fight.
Microsoft is mostly going after those without incentive to fight back. It uses software patents against them, rather than offer them something like Windows. That alone speaks volumes. Pogson ends by adding:
Making software is not a creative act and software patents are not stimulating innovation, it would seem. Software is a data structure and an algorithm, nothing more nor less. Once the information in the specification of those two elements is defined, the software follows and it can be created by almost any programmer skilled in the art. Thus, it fails non-obviousness. The information in the specification of the data structure and algorithm is not patentable, being merely an idea without physical embodiment. Putting software in a computer may give it physical embodiment but it is still obvious how it works when one looks at the source code.
Here is another noteworthy new article:
And don’t cry for Microsoft. While its new mobile OS rise has yet to be a rise at all, the company is making money on–get this–Android patent enforcement. That is, by dint of its thousands of software patents, Microsoft has succeeded in getting the likes of HTC to pay license fees, and now it’s going after Samsung. Cue the jokes about blue screens of death in outer space.
In a research note, Wells Fargo estimated Windows Phone 7 revenue of $500 million in 2011; and more than $1 billion for Android licenses in 2012 if it charged $10 per license.
Microsoft continues destroying the software industry, substituting it with lawyers and ruthless businessmen. It is not just bad for developers, it is bad for everyone (who sees product prices elevated due to bureaucracy fees/costs). The word “innovation” lost its meaning (we covered this recently and even years ago) and now it is used to justify decreased competition, retarded products (which have features removed due to patents), and increased collusion (which is a form of crime that regulators rarely address because it is done by corporations to people rather than the other way around). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA