02.14.12
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Oracle at 5:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An update on the defensive action taken to keep Android free
THE situation Android is in seems to be improving on the legal front. Apple meets blowback and the Oracle case seems to be weakening with Lindholm and Cockburn making an appearance again. What Microsoft lobbyists try to portray as Google aggression is in fact always defensive and reactionary. This too is a case of deterrence against Apple (after Apple sued):
“The court has come to the conclusion that the wording of the patent does cover functions that were at issue here,” Voss said Feb. 3. Apple “wasn’t able to convince the court that it isn’t infringing.”
ICloud is a service that automatically stores photos, songs and other files on servers at Apple’s data centers for use on all of a customer’s gadgets.
The case is the second Motorola Mobility, the mobile-phone maker being acquired by Google Inc. (GOOG), has won in a German court against Apple. The company is seeking to enforce an injunction in the first case involving a cellular-communications patent that led Apple to remove some older iPhones and iPad models from its online store in Germany overnight.
A Microsoft booster reports on the ITC case proceeding despite a bit of disinformation:
Barnes & Noble just gained a big ally in its patent-infringement battle with Microsoft.
An attorney in the U.S. agency where the fight is being waged said he thinks the bookseller is in the right.
Jeff Hsu, a staff attorney at the U.S. International Trade Commission, said that he is recommending that ITC Judge Theodore Essex find there was no violation by Barnes & Noble of three Microsoft patents, reports Bloomberg.
This sort of debunks FUD from the Microsoft lobbyist (debunked by Groklaw too). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.03.12
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 11:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Image credited to Groklaw.net
Summary: A few updates of greater importance where the Linux situation is discussed in the context of Android and Novell
THE patent assault on Android is one that we cover here several times per week because Android is perhaps the best example of Linux in the mainstream (criticisms aside) and it helps show the lengths to which Microsoft and Apple would go to derail Linux, even with software patents as we predicted for more than half a decade.
Professor Webbink from Groklaw is perhaps the best source of news about the Oracle vs. Google case, which he claims to be moving along as follows:
Just because the Oracle v. Google case has not been set for trial (and won’t be until at least the time at which Oracle provides its third attempt at a damages report) does not mean the court can’t move the case along, and that is what Judge Alsup has done with his latest order. In an attempt to narrow the issues to be argued at trial, Judge Alsup’s latest order (708 [PDF; Text]) focuses on the copyright issues and directs the parties to provide opening briefs in which they identify each remaining claim of copyright liability and the affirmative defenses to each such claim. In addition, the parties are to identify those issues that should be resolved by the court and those underlying facts that first need to be decided by the jury.
Groklaw continues to face a barrage of FUD from Microsoft boosters who continue to spin/modify the news (in this case about OpenStack wanting to toss Microsoft out) and Microsoft lobbyists who are distorting the story about the ITC and then seeding disinformation in the corporate press along with pro-Microsoft blogs. Pamela Jones from Groklaw debunks the nonsense and explains:
I’m seeing a couple of articles about an initial determination by the ITC against Barnes & Noble on its patent misuse defense, and there’s quite a lot of spin on the ball, thanks to the usual suspects. They are reading a lot into a title of a sealed document. I see many misstatements.
So I’ll explain a little about the process, so you can understand it. For one thing, the title of the sealed ITC initial determination is called an *initial* determination for a reason. It means it isn’t final. The final one comes later. Initial determinations can be reviewed by the full ITC if the defendant petitions for review and even one Commissioner says yes.
Litigation isn’t like football. It is rarely suddenly over.
Most importantly, the materials and depositions Barnes & Noble is seeking in discovery from Nokia and MOSAID have not yet arrived, although the ITC did grant Barnes & Noble’s motion to ask Finland and Canada to provide them, and that’s still ongoing, so there is likely more to go, even at the ITC. So with those materials not yet in hand, Microsoft’s statement today that this means the defense is meritless is… well… to put it kindly premature. I mean, if a determination is made without the complete record being available, what does it mean?
The case is important because it’s about Microsoft’s patent abuses against Android, as well as some of the patent trolls Microsoft is using. Last year we wrote a great deal about Novell’s patents, which went to CPTN, i.e. to Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, and EMC (3 of these are Android foes). Here is a new article about the Department of Justice. Part of it says:
Another example of international cooperation was the Antitrust Division’s close cooperation “with the German Federal Cartel Office on the acquisition of certain patents and patent applications from Novell Inc. by CPTN Holdings (a holding company owned by Microsoft Inc., Oracle Corp., Apple Inc. and EMC Corp.). This was the first merger enforcement cooperation the Division had had with Germany in 20 years.”
Novell became just a pile of patents, which gave Microsoft ammunition with which to threaten UNIX/Linux. The authorities needed to step in after the OSI and FSF had filed a formal complaint. Here is the story of another company which rapidly becomes just a pile of patents. It says: “Remember, back in August, shortly after Google’s purchase of Motorola, Kodak looked like the next company in line for an IP-driven payday. Analysts looking at the high valuations of the Novell, Nortel and Motorola portfolios estimated Kodak had $3 billion in IP assets alone: with a market capitalization of just $700 million, it seemed like easy money. Kodak’s stock rose accordingly in anticipation of a white knight around the corner.”
This is of course not innovation. It’s a case of virtual “goods” being used to make lawyers richer and interfere with fair competition.
Novell, by the way, has just been assigned another patent, according to this roundup from January 22nd. Any new patents in Novell’s hands might eventually be passed to Linux foes, not the OIN. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.01.12
Posted in Apple, Bill Gates, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Patents at 6:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Response to reputation laundering from Wired Magazine, the latest nonsense from Microsoft’s lobbyist Florian Müller, an update on Microsoft’s trolling against Android, and a little more of Apple’s
WE are quite cynical about the corporate press. It has become abundantly clear that journalism is dying and instead it gets accommodated/replaced by the PR industry, working at the behest of rich people with an agenda and a nickel for any press still willing to bend over (independent press is likely to perish in the process). Like a husband who tells the policeman or the judge that he deeply loves the woman whom he beats up daily, Bill Gates/Gates Foundation would love for us to believe that he is a master of Open Source. Yes, and Cade Metz trying to portray these racketeers as friends of Open Source (whitewashing Gates at the same time). Why would anyone with integrity do reputation laundering for a criminal and his company that commits acts of extortion? Even Gutierrez gets characterised positively:
But that afternoon was different. At the invitation of the company’s chief legal minds — Smith and Gutierrez — Ramji sat down with Gates, chief software architect Ray Ozzie, and a few others to discuss whether Microsoft could actually start using open source software. Ramji and Ozzie were on one side of the argument, insisting that Microsoft embrace open source, and Gutierrez offered a legal framework that could make that possible. But other top executives strongly challenged the idea.
Then Bill Gates stood up.
No, Bill Gates has been attacking Open Source for a very long time. Remember that Letter to Hobbyists? And all those court exhibits we showed? We oughn’t allow history to be rewritten like this. Over at Free Software Daily, the modified headline of this article states “Meet Mobster Bill Gates, the Man Who Charges Open Source Software even if is free Android Linux” (the original is troll article that attracted many comments, for being more inflammatory than sane).
Microsoft is currently feeding patent trolls in order to attack Linux. Microsoft does not have enough ammunition to attack Linux, so it uses help from the outside.
Pamela Jones, over at Groklaw, writes more about the case that seeks to expose MOSAID, a patent troll that Microsoft is feeding. To quote part of the analysis:
B&N and Microsoft have come to an agreement about Steve Ballmer’s participation in the Microsoft v. Barnes & Noble action at the ITC. They were arguing about it, and they’ve now agreed that Ballmer will not have to testify live at the ITC hearing, currently scheduled for February. Instead, B&N will present designated portions of his deposition, and Microsoft’s lawyers have sent a letter [PDF] to the ITC stating officially that it withdraws its motion for a protective order, attaching to the letter a proposed schedule on the parties’ next steps in figuring out exactly what each side wants in the way of details. This means there will be no further motion practice on the live testimony issue.
[...]
Microsoft is also opposing Barnes & Noble’s request that the record be held open to include Nokia and MOSAID’s evidence, if Barnes & Noble is finally able to get it. And they parties continue to try to whittle into shape what each may use as evidence.
Lots of sealed filings, once again. But don’t worry. By hook or by crook, we usually find out in due time what the filings were about.
I had a chance to talk to Andy Updegrove, of Standards Blog, who as you probably know is a lawyer who does patent work in the standards area. I wanted to pick his brain, because the 2000 patents Nokia sold to MOSAID relate to standards, according to their statements. Just how many patents could possibly be required for a phone to be built? Surely not 1,200 out of the 2,000, I was thinking. Yet, that is the claim.
[...]
He suggested that we read some Department of Justice ‘business review letters’ on patent pools, because a patent pool is an example of multiple patent owners getting together to agree on a price for technology required to implement a standard. That’s not exactly what Microsoft, Nokia and MOSAID say they are doing, but we’re getting warm. You get to read in the letters the way the pool participants set the pool up, what safeguards they took (in the request letter), and the way the DoJ analyzed the request and either approved, qualified, or rejected the request. The controls traditionally include hiring a third party expert to review each supposedly essential claim and determine whether it’s valid, whether it’s essential, and what it’s worth relative to the other essential claims. So he thought we might find it interesting to look at what a legal pool looks like, and then we can contrast that to the actual conduct that is being alleged here.
This case has not been decided yet, but it does help shed a lot of light on Microsoft’s racketeering.
The known Microsoft boosters and even lobbyists (whom they cite) try to make us believe that it’s all over and Microsoft is innocent. Some people fall for it. They also push this tripe into Slashdot with all the bias and misdirection. As Homer put it in USENET, we should just ignore the Microsoft lobbyist. To quote: “Note this is only the conclusion drawn by Microsoft’s pet shill, Florian Müller (who’s now openly on Microsoft’s payroll), and he drew this stunning conclusion from just the /title/ of a docket he doesn’t even have access to, because it’s still under seal.
“It’s also, as the title suggests, just an “Initial Determination”, and may yet be disputed by the DOJ – a fact Müller chose to ignore. He also chose to ignore several of B&N’s valid complaints that might yet cause
the DOJ to overturn this conclusion, even if it turns out to be true and “final”, such as Microsoft deliberately withholding prior art in its various patent applications, and using NDAs to cover up extortion, under
the pretext of “secrets” that are in fact a matter of public record (as all patents are required to be by law). But instead he portrayed B&N’s complaint as futile, because:
“For example, Barnes & Noble claimed that Microsoft asked for excessively high patent license fees, but the OUII quoted passages from U.S. law (statutory as well as case law) that clearly said that patent law doesn’t require a patent holder to grant a license on any terms.”
“Then he completely ignores all the other key points (above). This seems to be the entire basis for his pessimism (or I should say “optimism”, since it’s clear whose side he’s on).”
Microsoft is feeding lobbyists and trolls and it’s easy to see this. Apple is said to have been sued by trolls again, but since Apple itself acts like a patent troll we have no sympathy for it. To quote:
A patent troll is going after Apple for patent infringement of an “electronic alignment system”.
Apple’s spiritual leader’s friend, Larry Ellison, is still attacking Android with patents that he got from Sun. Google gets another opportunity.
Mr. Pogson summarises: “Google argues that Oracle’s experts are not expert as they had no intimate knowledge during deposition.”
Basically, it seems like Oracle’s patent case against Android will be coming to an end. Maybe a copyright allegation alone will be left, so think along the lines of SCO.
OIN is meanwhile growing strong:
OIN today announced a remarkable increase in the size of its community of licensees during 2011 as licensees seized the opportunity to benefit from the value of the growing OIN community and the freedom of action enabled by OIN’s royalty free licensing program. During 2011, OIN’s community grew to over 400 corporate licensees, a more than 60% year over year increase. OIN licensees, which include founding members and associate members, benefit from the leverage provided by a patent portfolio dedicated to the protection of Linux and access to enabling technologies through OIN and shared intellectual property resources.
What’s baffling is that Oracle is in the OIN. It never ought to have attacked in the first place, but maybe it was a favour to the thermonuclear CEO, Larry Ellison’s “best friend” (by his own words). It is not a far fetched hypothesis. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.25.12
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Patents at 9:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: A collection of news about the litigious challenges from monopolists against Linux in the mainstream
THERE IS something about the patent system that nobody can miss. Its main proponents and benefactors are those greedy patent lawyers who want to put their tentacles on real work and tax it. People who file those are typically those patent lawyers who somehow convince technical people that they need a monopoly. In the case of multinational mega-corporations, those monopolies might make business sense, but what about the rest of the businesses?
Patent trolls further complicate the situation because all they do is raise the price of everything and promote no agenda of a producing company (quite the contrary in fact). One new article asks, are “Legal: Ecommerce Owners Liable to Patent Trolls?”
To quote:
There has recently been an increase in the number of patent claims against website developers and operators. The claims are based on “business method” and software patents for various functions of a website, such as drop-down menus, site search, and other common functions. Many of these functions are in common use by many developers, who do not know that the software or method they are using is covered by a patent. Many of these patents are old, and developers have furthered website development using their functions to create new technologies, which are still covered by the patent. In addition, searching patent registrations to determine if your website is infringing on an issued patent is difficult, time consuming, and expensive. “Patent trolls” are patent owners that take advantage of the difficulties of finding a patent, and lie in wait for someone to use their technology without realizing it is covered by the patent owners rights under their patent.
The USPTO has widened the scope of patentability to the realms of the absurd. Sun Microsystems engineers used to joke about it and see how absurd a patent application can pass muster. Later on their patents ended up in Oracle’s hand to attack Linux/Android. Regarding this case, Groklaw writes:
With that short statement [PDF] Oracle advised the court today that it will undertake a third attempt to produce a satisfactory damages report and that it will do so in compliance with the orders of the court. I have no doubt they will produce the report. Whether they will be able to restrain themselves in the manner directed by the court remains to be seen. If past history is any indication, don’t hold your breath.
Oracle is trying to make Android more expensive. Along with Oracle we have Microsoft and its proxies doing the same thing. One patent troll, MOSAID, is quite clearly such a proxy and Groklaw has this to say about its case against Red Hat:
Facing numerous filings that either seek to dismiss MOSAID’s claims altogether or to block MOSAID from filing a second amended complaint, MOSAID has now responded with a raft of responses. Of course, MOSAID believes the law is on its side and that all parties should remain in the conjoined suit and all of MOSAID’s new claims added in the second amended complaint should be permitted. How the court decides these issues will largely determine whether this ends up as one suit or multiple suits. In any case, don’t expect MOSAID to back down.
Let’s remember Microsoft’s involvement in passing thousands of patents to MOSAID. Then there’s Apple, which launched attacks on Android/Linux (starting with the Apple vs. HTC case), but as another court loss is reached it seems possible that Apple cannot do much:
The lawsuit that Apple slammed HTC with is over and $100 million in legal fees later, Apple have nothing to show for it. Apple have been known to protect their design patents fiercely and in some instances, irrationally and for many who have been following the HTC lawsuit, the same thoughts ring, what exactly was Apple hoping to achieve through the lawsuit?
To quote another report:
The decision was an appeal of a ruling from a lower regional court in August 2011, requesting a temporary injunction. At the time, Apple did win a temporary injunction in the Netherlands. However, it was based on a photo gallery scrolling patent and not design-related patents, which were ruled not to infringe in the ruling on Tuesday.
The British press covered this as well [1, 2], not to mention Android sites that wrongly characterise a Microsoft lobbyist as a FOSS advocate:
After a solid year of courts beckoning to Apple’s call, it would seem that sanity is returning to European benches. Taking a queue from Germany, which is set to reject Apple’s patent case over the revised Galaxy Tab 10.1N, a Dutch court rejected Apple’s final appeal to get Samsung’s tablet banned from sale in the Netherlands. Free and Open Source Software advocate Florian Mueller reported the legal news on the FOSS Patents blog. The appeal denial is the latest in a string of many Apple defeats and few victories in the last few months.
Florian is definitely not a FOSS advocate; he is the exact opposite, but he names himself to confuse. He is paid by Microsoft to attack FOSS causes. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.24.12
Posted in Antitrust, Apple, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 12:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The duopoly which is Apple and Microsoft faces new legal challenges while the patent assault heats up
APPLE’S growth is impeded by the rise of Android. The dead CEO vowed to destroy Android, so we have no sympathy for him or for the cult he created. In fact, we urge people not to buy from Apple until or unless it stops suing (to embargo) its competitors, notably Linux/Android.
In a new post from Muktware we read about the latest lawsuit against Apple, this time for anti-competitive behaviour (again):
Apple Sued For Anti-Competitive Practices
A federal antitrust class action lawsuit has been filed against Apple accusing the company of billing iPhone customers for voice and data services even after they cancel it. They also Apple of stifling competition and increasing prices for software apps by charging developers an annual ‘application’ fee.
The Courthouse News reports that lead plaintiff Eric Terrell accuses Apple of ‘unlawful anticompetitive activities,’ and claims that consumers did not contractually consent to Apple and AT&T’s 5-year exclusivity agreement.
Fortunately, Apple’s behaviour is likely to just drive people away to Linux and even the lawsuit from Oracle (perhaps in part motivated by Apple’s CEO) won’t be able to stop it. The Oracle case is just another SCO and the outcome might be the same, except for the bankruptcy.
Microsoft too has been flirting and collaborating with Apple's lawyers, according to recent reports. Microsoft engages in illegal tactics and conspiracy to harm a potent rival. Having been faced with a legal challenge,Groklaw claims that the plot is being unravelled and Microsoft’s attack through Nokia becomes too hard to deny. To quote:
Nokia continues to struggle mightily to get free from Barnes & Noble’s discovery requests. Barnes & Noble, you’ll recall, succeeded in persuading the ITC to recommend that Finland help it to do depositions of some Nokia executives, including Stephen Elop, and also get its hands on some documents that Nokia isn’t willing to provide voluntarily.
So the necessary request documents were sent to Finland, and then Nokia started going wild with efforts to block. And it continues to do so, telling the court all the steps it’s taken, and asking ITC to quash the Barnes & Noble motion or in the alternative to advise Finland that it can’t provide any discovery until the motion is ruled on. Nokia also has complaints about what it represents to both Finland and the ITC as being Barnes & Noble’s misstatements about the case.
And now Microsoft has asked the court to quash a motion to depose Steve Ballmer. It’s under seal, but I’m sure we can guess at its contents. After all, we’ve seen companies try to keep their executives from having to get involved in litigation before, and so far, they all had to testify. Remember SCO v. IBM? Sam Palmisano had to testify because he had “unique personal knowledge”, or so the judge believed. If the CEO knows things other people don’t, no matter how busy he is, he will likely have to testify. I’m sure Microsoft lawyers know that, so in the alternative, they ask that he be allowed to testify by videoconference.
We warned about this right from the start. It is good to see action being taken to expose this at the courts and set obstacle.
In other news, RIM, whose key executives leave, finds itself sued over patents again. Guess who’s suing again?
Ottawa-based Wi-LAN Inc. has launched a patent suit against Research In Motion Ltd., adding to the challenges facing the troubled BlackBerry maker.
The mobile patent wars are becoming nasty and when Microsoft passes ammunition to patent trolls (proxies) there needs to be a lot more investigation. it’s not as shallow as it may seem. █
“On the same day that CA blasted SCO, Open Source evangelist Eric Raymond revealed a leaked email from SCO’s strategic consultant Mike Anderer to their management. The email details how, surprise surprise, Microsoft has arranged virtually all of SCO’s financing, hiding behind intermediaries like Baystar Capital.”
–Bruce Perens
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.23.12
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Patents at 6:37 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Patent stories that mostly relate to Android and its competitors
THE sales of Windows continue to decline as Linux-based platforms gain traction (notably Android).
As Tim points out, Microsoft trolls just attack messengers now and moreover:
Microsoft Advocates who infest the newsgroups, who engage in personal attacks and vile insults claim that the desktop is still alive and well! They claim that the tablet form factor is not what the mainstream consumer is wanting! – The reality though outside the wibbly wobbly world of Microsoft Advocacy is very different and I think the trend away from the desktop form factor by the mainstream consumer will continue. As for Windows and the latest “great” version (8), I think by the time it finally flops onto the market, people will have already settled on the plethora of more mature alternatives leaving Microsoft languishing in a Windows Phone 7 market share hell.
Microsoft is resorting to the use of patents in this age of software patents boosting; those parasites are extorting those who do sell (at Windows’ expense) and Mr. Pogson tried to find some numbers:
Much has been written on the web about M$’s taxation of Android/Linux but M$ mentions little but lawsuits in its recent 10-Q report. In fact, there we read, “there are approximately 60 other patent infringement cases pending against Microsoft.” Nowhere is there a number showing revenue from royalties levied on Android/Linux. While noting the risk of consumers buying gadgets not running M$’s stuff M$ never mentions royalty income from those gadgets. It must not be substantial because hundreds of millions of units running Android/Linux were sold but royalty revenue by M$ was not enough to prevent a decline in revenue by their client division.
We reckon that many of Microsoft’s patent deals put a small tax only as symbolic as Microsoft needs for them to provide FUD. But patent trolls and proxies like MOSAID are then being sent to push further up the price of Linux/Android. That’s their goal. It’s about destroying the economic advantage of Android, more so than to be a Microsoft cash cow.
We have two options now; one is for Microsoft to be nailed for creating an anti-competitive conspiracy against Android; the other is to target the patent system that enables this to carry on. With more software patents being granted all the time in the US (e.g. this new roundup from Iowa) the problem is clearly getting worse; more and more ideas are being “stolen” from the Commons. IBM too seeks a patent monopoly on software. To quote one article about it:
According to the document, the patent covers “techniques for protecting a child user from inappropriate interactions within an immersive virtual environment” in which those actions may be determined by “examining characteristics of the interactions between a child and another user”, “by monitoring physical signs of stress in the child”, or “by receiving software commands given by the child to signal discomfort in a particular situation”. Once detected, the technology may take action by “notifying the parents of the child, altering the virtual world to end the interaction, or notifying authorities of the behavior of the other user.”
Here is a new post which demonstrates how messed up the USPTO is:
Aleks Yankelevich drew my attention to an interesting patent case Gore versus Garlock. The Federal Circuit court decided to reverse a lower court reaching the stunning conclusion that prior art doesn’t matter if it was kept secret. So if you invent something and keep it secret, someone else can patent it.
There are also some newer articles about items we mentioned before, such as this one from Microsoft:
Despite the fact that the word “ghetto” was not a part of the patent paperwork, the program has been nicknamed the “Avoid the Ghetto” app.
[...]
This has led to cries of racism and economic disadvantage for minority neighborhoods. Dallas branch NAACP President Juanita Wallace told CBS, “I’m going to be up in arms about it if it happens. Can you imagine me not being able to go to Martin Luther King Boulevard. because my GPS says that’s a dangerous crime area? I can’t even imagine that.”
For whatever reason Google is still being scrutinised while it is in fact a victim of litigation from Apple, Microsoft, and some of their front groups (CPTN, for example, includes Oracle too). To quote:
Regulatory reviews mean the purchase by Google is likely to close in 2012, Libertyville, Illinois-based Motorola Mobility said in November. Google plans to use Motorola Mobility’s more than 17,000 patents to protect supporters of its Android software in licensing and legal disputes with rivals such as Apple Inc. — and also move into the hardware business.
Here is another report about the Alcatel case we wrote about the other day:
SOFTWARE HOUSE Microsoft and Alcatel-Lucent have ended their patent lawsuit and told the judge that they have had enough.
The lawsuit has lasted ten years so it is perhaps through attrition that it has come to an end. Either way both parties asked US District Court Judge Marilyn Huff to dismiss all claims and just get over the whole business.
Last year we claimed that Apple and Microsoft were colluding against Android and Google validated this in the middle of the year. This new report too helps validate it even more:
If you were searching for Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s European patent lawyers on a Friday, you would have better luck looking in the German city of Mannheim than on the golf course or in a pub.
Judges in the southwest German city hold most patent hearings on the last day of the week and will issue rulings in smartphone disputes involving Apple, Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) and Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. over four of the next five Fridays starting today. The city, along with Dusseldorf and Munich, has become the center of European patent litigation as companies seek quick rulings from German judges that influence courts throughout the continent.
“If you have a big multinational corporation setting up a patent litigation strategy for Europe, they will almost always sue in Germany,” said Rowan Freeland, a litigator at Simmons & Simmons LLP in London. “Maybe you add other countries as well, but if you have to choose, it’s almost certainly Germany.”
Mobile device makers filed dozens of cases in the three cities last year. Samsung today lost a patent-infringement suit filed against Apple in the Mannheim court. The judges also heard another suit between the two rivals. A hearing in two disputes between Motorola Mobility and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) originally scheduled for this afternoon were postponed until next month.
They have a common interest as both are suffering from Linux. But their tool for competing, namely patent attacks, is not acceptable, especially when they do so with the goal of removing competition from the market. It’s doupoly abuse [1, 2, 3], or simply a cartel. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.21.12
Posted in Antitrust, GNU/Linux, Google, Patents at 11:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Developments on the patents front and how they affect the Linux-powered Android platform
THERE is usually danger that proprietary software vendors will hijack the voice of FOSS ones. The infiltration which we previously mentioned is further promoted by Microsoft-friendly circles. It is a true danger when FOSS is being hijacked (and Microsoft lobbyists, for example, call themselves “FOSS patents”).
There has been a campaign designed to derail Google’s acquisition of patents that would defend Android. Microsoft lobbyists participated in this campaign. According to this update from Bloomberg:
Regulatory reviews mean the purchase by Google is likely to be completed in 2012, Libertyville, Illinois-based Motorola Mobility said in November. Google plans to use Motorola Mobility’s more than 17,000 patents to protect supporters of its Android software in licensing and legal disputes with rivals such as Apple Inc. (AAPL) — and also move into the hardware business.
More here:
European Union regulators restarted their antitrust review of plans by Google Inc., the biggest maker of smartphone software, to buy Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc.
The European Commission set a new deadline of Feb. 13 to rule on the deal. It stopped the review on Dec. 6 to seek more information from the companies.
Where were the regulators when Microsoft extorted a lot of companies using patents. With more patents on software being granted, the regulators are missing the point. The one new example says:
EliteForm’s PowerTracker uses patent-pending algorithms and the latest in 3D computer vision to track the movement of athletes during strength exercises without the use of wired attachments.
Patents on algorithms? That is not allowed in Europe.
To quote more from Bloomberg:
The number of patents in litigation between Apple Inc. (AAPL) and a Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. (MMI) unit was narrowed by a judge who invalidated two of them, said Apple didn’t infringe a third and found that issues with five others required a trial.
Apple is losing its case against Motorola and new patents from its patent worship sites suggest that monopolies on Siri are coming:
That application, published this morning by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and picked up by Patently Apple, details an “Intelligent Automated Assistant.” The filing, dated January 2011, comes some nine months after Apple’s acquisition of Siri the company, and includes numerous diagrams of the software in use.
Sadly for Apple, on the Android side there are also many patents that can be used defensively and Ericsson/Sony is among those with an arsenal (the Microsoft lobbyist tries to spin it against Android). Moreover, Larry Ellison’s attack on Android is failing again:
The parties in Oracle v. Google have been busy debating whether or not Oracle should be allowed to submit yet a third expert damages report, after the judge found the first two were ridiculous. He didn’t accept the way Oracle came up with such huge damages numbers, the very ones that made headlines when the case was new.
And more remarks from Mr. Pogson can be found here.
A few days ago we wrote about the patent allegations/charges from Oracle allegedly being conceded and here is more on that:
In a surprise detail, Oracle also claimed that Sun Microsystems was looking to get into the smartphone game. Oracle wrote, “Sun had plans and the means to use that intellectual property to develop a smartphone platform that would have generated hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues. These plans were undermined by Google’s release of an incompatible Android for free.”
Oracle’s claim that Sun was looking to develop a smartphone operating system is an interesting one given that the firm’s Java Mobile Edition was hardly setting the world alight when Apple’s IOS came out, let alone Google’s Android. It will be interesting to see what, if any, evidence Oracle has to back up this statement.
The Oracle versus Google Android battle has stalled twice over arguments about the amount of damages. Whether Oracle’s latest ploy will result in any of its patent claims being put in front of a jury is unclear at this point.
If true, then it marks a small victory for Android, but the Microsoft lobbyists try to spin as it bad news.
In other news, Microsoft might pay Alcatel soon:
A jury awarded Alcatel-Lucent $70 million after Microsoft was found to have stolen a Day patent in its Outlook software.
More here;
Alcatel-Lucent (ALU), Microsoft Patent-Infringement Case Dismissed
Alcatel-Lucent (ALU)’s patent-infringement lawsuit against Microsoft Corp., (MSFT) the world’s largest maker of software, was dismissed by a federal judge after both companies asked to end the case.
U.S. District Judge Marilyn Huff granted the joint motion to end all claims in the suit with each side agreeing to bear its own costs, according to a filing Jan. 17 in San Diego. No information was given on a possible settlement of the dispute.
In July, a jury awarded Paris-based Alcatel-Lucent $70 million in damages. Huff reduced the award to $26.3 million on Nov. 10.
Alcatel-Lucent sued over technology in Redmond, Washington- based Microsoft’s Outlook program and two other applications.
The case is Lucent Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 07-02000, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
And more here:
Alcatel-Lucent’s patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft Corp., the world’s largest maker of software, was dismissed by a federal judge after both companies asked to end the case.
U.S. District Judge Marilyn Huff granted the joint motion to ends all claims in the suit with each side agreeing to bear its own costs, according to a filing yesterday in San Diego. No information was given on a possible settlement of the dispute.
Microsoft was probably required to pay. Maybe it will also learn a lesson about the patent system, one lawsuit at the time (I have purchased an Alcatel phone for this reason), then withdraw from its anti-Linux blackmail. And speaking of Microsoft, its racist side (deleting black people) is arguably resurfacing again in a patent:
Microsoft faces accusations of potential racism related to its patent for a new pedestrian-friendly map application.
To be fair, geography/demography and race are not the same thing. Microsoft gets flak nonetheless, for a patent so stupid that its existence alone is offensive to human civilisation. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.19.12
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft at 11:05 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The versatile kernel which makes several mobile platforms rapidly changes the competitive landscape
SEVERAL years ago people were occasionally laughed at for suggesting that Linux would become dominant and desktops would lose share to mobile devices. Now that mobile devices are very sophisticated they manage to challenge miniature desktops/laptops such as Microsoft’s Origami. They are also far cheaper.
The “year of Linux on the desktop” might be some time around 5 years ago when it became viable for many reasons (regardless of market share/installed base) and this goal has become somewhat irrelevant now that mobile devices are a lucrative market. Apple becomes a cash-rich company, a big foe of Linux (with lawsuits), and in some ways the main player to compete against.
When it comes to mobile devices, Microsoft is not an imminent threat and as this new article puts it, price and weight keep Microsoft out of the game:
A rumor site claims that Intel tablets running Windows 8 will start at $600 and cost as much as $900, putting Apple and Android at a pricing advantage.
Have you ever wondered why your PC is so expensive? Well, a good portion of that cash goes straight into the pockets of Intel for its processors and Microsoft for Windows. Unfortunately, while the market has seen that the days of expensive PCs are over, executives at Microsoft and Intel may fight to retain high PC prices as we move into the next era of the PC: tablets.
Microsoft just tries cheating now.
Techrights will spend time concentrating not only on Linux’s real competitors in this area but also Microsoft’s patent attacks on Android. We used to focus on Novell, but now we need to identify the remaining barriers to software freedom. Readers reaffirmed this strategy. █
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