US trade watchdog deep-sixes patent infringement claim against Microsoft Microsoft has swerved a potentially crushing blow to its vanishingly small mobile biz, after a US watchdog swiped away a request to block the import of its Lumia handsets into the country. InterDigital, which had been in a patent spat with Nokia many years before Redmond scooped up the mobile maker, said it was disappointed …
"... and discriminating against MS because it's a small player in the market."
Remember, lawyers are always advocates for the side that's paying them, not truth-tellers. They will present any possible 'evidence' as reasons for their client to win.
Lawyers are the car salesmen of the legal system.
This post has been deleted by its author
"In some regions, Windows Phone is very popular, for example in Italy, so it would be interesting to know the basis for this claim."
You are right - it would be interesting to know the basis for this claim. Care to cite? Anecdotally, I don't recall seeing any at all in my, admittedly, brief forays around Italia.
However I will stick my neck out and opine that no Italian from the Napoli region (at least) is capable of owning a car without at least one dent in its body work. On reflection, I may stretch that to include most, if not all of Italia. That is a land where you use the entire car as an indicator, rather than rely on little orange flashing lights.
This post has been deleted by its author
"charging too much, tying in useless patents to essential ones, not actually making any products and discriminating"
And Microsoft says this? I thought that is what Microsoft did all the time.
Pot, Kettle, Black...
p.s. I kinda agree with the sentiment about lawyers, but I digress.
"charging too much, tying in useless patents to essential ones, not actually making any products and discriminating"
And Microsoft says this? I thought that is what Microsoft did all the time.
Which patents MS is charging too much or bundling with others?
Microsoft makes loads of products. For example, most computers contain software made by MS.
Which customers MS is discriminating?
Cue downvotes in 3...2...1.
"Which patents MS is charging too much or bundling with others?"
Are you kidding? Microsoft makes more money ripping off Android phone manufacturers for bogus patents than it sells Windows phones!
It's why companies in the phone space need lots of patents. So Microsoft/Nokia don't sue. What's the word: "Cartel"?
"Which patents MS is charging too much or bundling with others?"
Are you kidding? Microsoft makes more money ripping off Android phone manufacturers for bogus patents than it sells Windows phones!
I'm not kidding. The questions stand - which patents MS is bundling with other patents?
MS is charging for patents - that is obvious. How much is MS charging and what would be the reasonable price?
It's why companies in the phone space need lots of patents. So Microsoft/Nokia don't sue. What's the word: "Cartel"?
The word is MAD. I think one player even used the phrase 'thermonuclear war'.
For what it's worth, the linked decision appears to indicate that the reason Microsoft won this time is because the Nokia phones don't actually infringe on the patents, the way the ITC reads the patent. There's a bit of discussion about the wording of the patents.
I say appears because the decision is appallingly poorly written, even by the standards of such decisions.
However, they don't mention Microsoft's other arguments about discrimination and so on in the key paragraphs where they give the actual reasons for their decision, near the end.
Those arguments are from Microsoft's suit against Interdigital, not the ITC.
If the decision is poorly worded that weakens it as a defence in ongoing or future lawsuits. Normally the courts would be inclined to rubberstamp an ITC decision. Microsoft's problems aren't necessarily over yet, this was the fast track process, now Interdigital will probably carry on in the courts.
I was criticizing Anglo-American patent law decisions in general. They're nearly all poorly written, and it's a trend that's been getting worse over the last few decades. Alas it doesn't seem to have much impact on how the courts view them, as many of the judges that Interdigital is likely to appeal to have a similar dreadful writing style.
Yes, I know that Microsoft was making the discrimination arguments. The point was that the ITC didn't even address them, but rather appeared to base its decision on an interpretation of the patent's wording.
This post has been deleted by its author
...get your prejudices out of the way first, becuase you may want MS to lose (for whatever reason), but these sort of suits could also apply to anyone else.
1. Microsoft are not trying to avoid paying license fee
2. Interdigital are not pure trolls, the do actual R&D. They may not make anything, but neither do ARM.
The issue is Interdigital's business practice of doing bundles that means you can't just pick the essentail licenses you need that would be covered by FRAND, but also force you to buy non-essential licenses you don't need, for which they can charge whatever they want.
This sort of business practice affects not just MS, but everyone.
So using everyones favourite analogy, cars. Any company is free to use an engine in their cars, but in order to do so, you have to buy a garden shed for everyone bought and if you make less than a million cars a year, you also have to buy dinghy.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
