| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 137645 | 2014-08-02 00:38:00 | MS to sue Samsung for failure to pay licenses on patents | Webdevguy (17166) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1380693 | 2014-08-03 02:39:00 | I'm cheering for no-one, the whole system is crock of ****. U.S. patent law is crazy. Samsung, M$, crApple, Horrorcle...etc etc... blah blah. They all suck a big one too. :p |
KarameaDave (15222) | ||
| 1380694 | 2014-08-03 02:49:00 | I'm cheering for no-one, the whole system is crock of ****. U.S. patent law is crazy. Samsung, M$, crApple, Horrorcle...etc etc... blah blah. They all suck a big one too. :p Almost gives the impression of everyone files law suits against everyone else -- then at knock off time --- See ya down the pub later tonight for drinks, we'll carry this on tomorrow ;) |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1380695 | 2014-08-03 02:52:00 | I'm cheering for no-one, the whole system is crock of ****. U.S. patent law is crazy. Samsung, M$, crApple, Horrorcle...etc etc... blah blah. They all suck a big one too. :p The shittiest part of the patent system seems to be that you can't protect your Intellectual Property from being ripped off by imitators, regardless of who you are. I think its great that a system was created that allowed the inventor or creator of some method, process or widget to protect that invention against malicious infringement, but the ability to be able to protect your IP seems to have been flushed down the toilet. And for the record, the fact that I choose to protect my patent or invention by legally licensing out its use or choosing not to, doesn't stop the innovation process, in theory it should only stop the act of copyright infringement or patent violation. |
Webdevguy (17166) | ||
| 1380696 | 2014-08-03 03:32:00 | Microsoft aren't saying they have patent rights over Android, its the MS patents that are being used. In that linked pdf, items 1 & 9, it states, what its about, AND Samsung signed a contract agreeing, now that are trying to weasel out of it. The wording that's important is "In Exchange for a Licence to use Microsoft Patents in Samsung's Androids Based smart phones and Tablets". This is completely different to saying patents on a free android system it self. If the whole thing if read, Part of item 25 & 30 & 44 is a rather Hmmmmm OK True. Though point 7 (relates to point 25) MS has elected to exclude their legal rights to all android devices from practicing their technology. This relates to earlier patents from the mid 90's - primary to do with using operating systems, electronic capture techniques, selection techniques, etc. Noted here (pocketnow.com) which Barnes and Noble are fighting MS for patent use. Seems all android device manufacturer's are paying a fee, making devices dearer. Yes Samsung did agree for that contract, hinges it seems on the Nokia purchase, which perhaps they should have purchased? |
kahawai chaser (3545) | ||
| 1380697 | 2014-08-03 03:42:00 | The shittiest part of the patent system seems to be that you can't protect your Intellectual Property from being ripped off by imitators, regardless of who you are. I think its great that a system was created that allowed the inventor or creator of some method, process or widget to protect that invention against malicious infringement, but the ability to be able to protect your IP seems to have been flushed down the toilet. And for the record, the fact that I choose to protect my patent or invention by legally licensing out its use or choosing not to, doesn't stop the innovation process, in theory it should only stop the act of copyright infringement or patent violation. True. Copycats are abound. Though patent battles may be selective. Why are not Apple taking on Xiaomo? (www.businessinsider.com.au) Or car manufacturer's against each other for many cars are similar. But the larger the company (e.g. global, like MS) the more patents they create or buy, making it difficult and costly for others to innovate in a short time frame for consumer benefit. |
kahawai chaser (3545) | ||
| 1380698 | 2014-08-03 03:44:00 | Yes Samsung did agree for that contract, hinges it seems on the Nokia purchase, which perhaps they should have purchased? Read point 44 in the PDF, ( in amongst the blacked out words) | wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1380699 | 2014-08-03 03:58:00 | True. Copycats are abound. Though patent battles may be selective. Why are not Apple taking on Xiaomo? (www.businessinsider.com.au) Or car manufacturer's against each other for many cars are similar. But the larger the company (e.g. global, like MS) the more patents they create or buy, making it difficult and costly for others to innovate in a short time frame for consumer benefit. The innovation process will always be and has always been a fairly long and costly idea development process, no matter who you are. That's why it is generally cheaper to find some way to reverse engineer the original idea or just copy it, re produce it and get it to market as fast as you can and undercut your competition and make as much money from it as you can then settle what ever lawsuit they hit you up with and then move on to the next idea. In terms of Samsung's agreement with MS over licensing patents, I'm all for changing your mind and legally breaking out of the agreement ( which normally comes at a cost) but to just change your mind and not tell any one and decide that you are going to keep using the patent but that you don't feel that you need to keep paying for it - That is violating the agreement. |
Webdevguy (17166) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||