You guys crack me up. Even when MS do something in support of Apple you still bad mouth them. I am positive that if MS found the cure for all worlds diseases and gave it to the world for free you lot would have something bad to say.
I am certain Bill Gates (and all of Microsoft) would like you to think of his foundation's work when you buy Microsoft products, but Microsoft and its products really need to stand on their own.
BS! How about all the Linux related FUD and Patent shakedowns? B&N is the only one standing up to Microsoft. Hopefully B&N wins and everyone Microsoft shook down sues Microsoft out of existence.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference.
Google are aligning themselves with Motorola's stance, refusing to commit to supporting the ideals that standards are based on.
As you brought up Linux I see Adobe is abandoning Flash for the platform.
You guys crack me up. Even when MS do something in support of Apple you still bad mouth them. I am positive that if MS found the cure for all worlds diseases and gave it to the world for free you lot would have something bad to say.
Apple, Google and MS are companies not religions!
Amen! MS could easily have flushed Apple down the toilet when SJ went cap in hand to ask for a loan and further releases of Office for Mac to be continued...but they didn't...
Amen! MS could easily have flushed Apple down the toilet when SJ went cap in hand to ask for a loan and further releases of Office for Mac to be continued...but they didn't...
Motorola ARE doing this, they are suing Microsoft over a H.264 standards based patent, in courts right now.
Your reference to a hypothetical situation involving Apple has no relevance.
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP.
Some of the patents Motorola is weilding against Apple aren't really FRAND either, but part of Apple's argument is Moto made a commitment to contribute any IP it thought to be essential. So whether it really was FRAND-encumbered or not, Apple argues they should have been according to Moto's commitments to the appropriate standards body.
Apple also made commitments as a member of W3C, yet like Moto doesn't actually want their essential patents technically included. Do you see a major difference in in the two regarding that particular issue? Apple just hasn't used theirs in a lawsuit... yet. But they made it clear they have that option.
EDIT: Hill60, isn't Florian Mueller one of those sources whose opinion you strongly trust? Seems you implied that a few times recently and curious if that's the way you feel.
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP.
Some of the patents Motorola is weilding against Apple aren't really FRAND either, but part of Apple's argument is Moto made a commitment to contribute any IP it thought to be essential. So whether it really was FRAND-encumbered or not, Apple argues they should have been according to Moto's commitments to the appropriate standards body.
Apple also made commitments as a member of W3C, yet like Moto doesn't actually want their essential patents technically included. Do you see a major difference in in the two regarding that particular issue? Apple just hasn't used theirs in a lawsuit... yet. But they made it clear they have that option.
EDIT: Hill60, isn't Florian Mueller one of those sources whose opinion you strongly trust? Seems you implied that a few times recently and curious if that's the way you feel.
The source is irrelevant, the fact that Motorola is suing Microsoft over a standards based H.264 patent is.
Unless a court is closed the proceedings are public knowledge, Mueller does a pretty good job of finding and reporting on these cases, giving links to court documents so that one can form their own opinion rather than accepting his.
The source is irrelevant, the fact that Motorola is suing Microsoft over a standards based H.264 patent is.
Unless a court is closed the proceedings are public knowledge, Mueller does a pretty good job of finding and reporting on these cases, giving links to court documents so that one can form their own opinion rather than accepting his.
So then you strongly trust Mr. Mueller's opinions? Pretty simple question.
Maybe we should resurrect trial by combat, which died out in the 16th century.
Seems like a perfectly sensible solution to me.
We need to do the same to sort out international conflicts. Next time leaders of countries have a disagreement, instead of sending the poor sods in the armed forces to do the fighting, the Presidents and Prime Ministers should just kick the shit out of each other.
What could possibly unite two countries more than the joy of watching politicians beating each other?
We need to do the same to sort out international conflicts. Next time leaders of countries have a disagreement, instead of sending the poor sods in the armed forces to do the fighting, the Presidents and Prime Ministers should just kick the shit out of each other.
What could possibly unite two countries more than the joy of watching politicians beating each other?
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP...
Not speaking to who is right or wrong, I think the key word in this argument is "essential." Who gets to make that decision? Sounds a lot like the principle behind eminent domain (which I'm totally opposed too). IMO nobody should have the right, by declaration, to insist a patent holder must give up their IP under FRAND rules just because everyone wants to use the IP. OTOH If you have IP and want it to be a standard, and you offer it as such, you can't just renege on the deal once made.
The issues aren't as cut-and-dried as Microsoft would have you believe either.
The W3C has been hard at work attempting to set standards (that FRAND licensing will then apply to) for the next gen web video standards under HTML5. So guess who is accused of obstructing those open standards? Not Google or even Microsoft, both of whom contributed to an initial standards doc published today
Rather than contribute IP that can't be worked around under the same terms as the other members of W3C, Apple wants to retain the right to sue others over those patents. In essence Apple wants the right to sue over standards patents. That's according to Florian Mueller at FOSSPatents.
Fair use of patents deemed essential to a standard? If it was Motorola doing this I imagine I know the answer here. In this case it's Apple. Still of the same opinion?
Granted neither the Motorola or Apple situation may be as clearly defined as some bloggers would make it out to be. Still, failure to adhere to your agreement to contribute IP the W3C has deemed essential so that FRAND licensing for the standards package can be put together doesn't sound like Apple is honoring the spirit of their agreement.
The web is more tangled than Apple and Microsoft want you to know.
I don't see how apple is in the wrong on this. Apple is well within its rights to not make its patents open to everybody without royalty!! (W3C does not do F/RAND, patents submitted to W3C become royalty-free to everybody). If apple believes that a couple of its patents should not become free for everybody, it has every right to do so. They even did one month before the deadline. So, wht's the problem there?
But, the Motorola situation is different. Motorola Mobility agreed to give its patents to create a standard, and now that others have started using the standards, they are back tracking and suing them for using those standards. That is just unethical. I think you lack judgement to compare the two.
... Apple wants the right to sue over standards patents. ...
This is such an entirely dishonest misrepresentation of the facts by GG, especially within the context he attempts to portray it and equate it with that there is nothing to call it other than a lie.
Interesting how a skilled propagandist can, using only facts, construct a lie.
So then you strongly trust Mr. Mueller's opinions? Pretty simple question.
Oh, right, I forgot this part... He's always trashing "Mr. Mueller" when his arguments are counter to GG's purposes (although, he usually calls him Florian when he's trashing him) but now it's all about him being a respected source.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference.
Google are aligning themselves with Motorola's stance, refusing to commit to supporting the ideals that standards are based on.
As you brought up Linux I see Adobe is abandoning Flash for the platform.
your reply makes zero sense. Did you reply to the wrong message? Microsoft has a long history of abusing patents and its illegally obtained monopoly position to cripple innovation. If you are replying to my posts, at least try to read them first.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference..
In reality they are. Here's where sleight of hand is advantageous. Simply transfer your FRAND-pledged essential patents to a 3rd party for a tiny fee with the requirement that they use them to sue others and split the money or they revert back. That's what Microsoft's trick is, and why they feel it's safe to say they won't sue over standards patents. Give them to MOSAID instead and obligate them to do the dirty work while letting MS claim to have clean hands.
Comments
You guys crack me up. Even when MS do something in support of Apple you still bad mouth them. I am positive that if MS found the cure for all worlds diseases and gave it to the world for free you lot would have something bad to say.
I am certain Bill Gates (and all of Microsoft) would like you to think of his foundation's work when you buy Microsoft products, but Microsoft and its products really need to stand on their own.
BS! How about all the Linux related FUD and Patent shakedowns? B&N is the only one standing up to Microsoft. Hopefully B&N wins and everyone Microsoft shook down sues Microsoft out of existence.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference.
Google are aligning themselves with Motorola's stance, refusing to commit to supporting the ideals that standards are based on.
As you brought up Linux I see Adobe is abandoning Flash for the platform.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference.
Google are aligning themselves with Motorola's stance, refusing to commit to supporting the ideals that standards are based on.
As you brought up Linux I see Adobe is abandoning Flash for the platform.
Agreed Hill60.
While it might still be a shakedown using patents that may not be valid/apply to Android in the first place, they aren't part of any standards AFAIK.
As far as I can see, there is only one way to sort out these patent battles.
CAGE FIGHTING!
Maybe we should resurrect trial by combat, which died out in the 16th century.
You guys crack me up. Even when MS do something in support of Apple you still bad mouth them. I am positive that if MS found the cure for all worlds diseases and gave it to the world for free you lot would have something bad to say.
Apple, Google and MS are companies not religions!
Amen! MS could easily have flushed Apple down the toilet when SJ went cap in hand to ask for a loan and further releases of Office for Mac to be continued...but they didn't...
Amen! MS could easily have flushed Apple down the toilet when SJ went cap in hand to ask for a loan and further releases of Office for Mac to be continued...but they didn't...
When is this myth going to die...
Fair use of patents deemed essential to a standard? If it was Motorola doing this... /snip.
Motorola ARE doing this, they are suing Microsoft over a H.264 standards based patent, in courts right now.
Your reference to a hypothetical situation involving Apple has no relevance.
Motorola ARE doing this, they are suing Microsoft over a H.264 standards based patent, in courts right now.
Your reference to a hypothetical situation involving Apple has no relevance.
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP.
Some of the patents Motorola is weilding against Apple aren't really FRAND either, but part of Apple's argument is Moto made a commitment to contribute any IP it thought to be essential. So whether it really was FRAND-encumbered or not, Apple argues they should have been according to Moto's commitments to the appropriate standards body.
Apple also made commitments as a member of W3C, yet like Moto doesn't actually want their essential patents technically included. Do you see a major difference in in the two regarding that particular issue? Apple just hasn't used theirs in a lawsuit... yet. But they made it clear they have that option.
EDIT: Hill60, isn't Florian Mueller one of those sources whose opinion you strongly trust? Seems you implied that a few times recently and curious if that's the way you feel.
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP.
Some of the patents Motorola is weilding against Apple aren't really FRAND either, but part of Apple's argument is Moto made a commitment to contribute any IP it thought to be essential. So whether it really was FRAND-encumbered or not, Apple argues they should have been according to Moto's commitments to the appropriate standards body.
Apple also made commitments as a member of W3C, yet like Moto doesn't actually want their essential patents technically included. Do you see a major difference in in the two regarding that particular issue? Apple just hasn't used theirs in a lawsuit... yet. But they made it clear they have that option.
EDIT: Hill60, isn't Florian Mueller one of those sources whose opinion you strongly trust? Seems you implied that a few times recently and curious if that's the way you feel.
The source is irrelevant, the fact that Motorola is suing Microsoft over a standards based H.264 patent is.
Unless a court is closed the proceedings are public knowledge, Mueller does a pretty good job of finding and reporting on these cases, giving links to court documents so that one can form their own opinion rather than accepting his.
The source is irrelevant, the fact that Motorola is suing Microsoft over a standards based H.264 patent is.
Unless a court is closed the proceedings are public knowledge, Mueller does a pretty good job of finding and reporting on these cases, giving links to court documents so that one can form their own opinion rather than accepting his.
So then you strongly trust Mr. Mueller's opinions? Pretty simple question.
Maybe we should resurrect trial by combat, which died out in the 16th century.
Seems like a perfectly sensible solution to me.
We need to do the same to sort out international conflicts. Next time leaders of countries have a disagreement, instead of sending the poor sods in the armed forces to do the fighting, the Presidents and Prime Ministers should just kick the shit out of each other.
What could possibly unite two countries more than the joy of watching politicians beating each other?
Seems like a perfectly sensible solution to me.
We need to do the same to sort out international conflicts. Next time leaders of countries have a disagreement, instead of sending the poor sods in the armed forces to do the fighting, the Presidents and Prime Ministers should just kick the shit out of each other.
What could possibly unite two countries more than the joy of watching politicians beating each other?
Russia would rule.
Russia would rule.
President Camacho would beg to differ...
Perhaps not to you. Others like Mr Mueller are of the opinion Apple is obstructing standards, and and insisting on retaining the right to sue over essential IP...
Not speaking to who is right or wrong, I think the key word in this argument is "essential." Who gets to make that decision? Sounds a lot like the principle behind eminent domain (which I'm totally opposed too). IMO nobody should have the right, by declaration, to insist a patent holder must give up their IP under FRAND rules just because everyone wants to use the IP. OTOH If you have IP and want it to be a standard, and you offer it as such, you can't just renege on the deal once made.
The issues aren't as cut-and-dried as Microsoft would have you believe either.
The W3C has been hard at work attempting to set standards (that FRAND licensing will then apply to) for the next gen web video standards under HTML5. So guess who is accused of obstructing those open standards? Not Google or even Microsoft, both of whom contributed to an initial standards doc published today
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw...ted-media.html
It's Apple that's accused of standing in the way.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...standard.shtml
Rather than contribute IP that can't be worked around under the same terms as the other members of W3C, Apple wants to retain the right to sue others over those patents. In essence Apple wants the right to sue over standards patents. That's according to Florian Mueller at FOSSPatents.
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...-wide-web.html
Fair use of patents deemed essential to a standard? If it was Motorola doing this I imagine I know the answer here. In this case it's Apple. Still of the same opinion?
Granted neither the Motorola or Apple situation may be as clearly defined as some bloggers would make it out to be. Still, failure to adhere to your agreement to contribute IP the W3C has deemed essential so that FRAND licensing for the standards package can be put together doesn't sound like Apple is honoring the spirit of their agreement.
The web is more tangled than Apple and Microsoft want you to know.
I don't see how apple is in the wrong on this. Apple is well within its rights to not make its patents open to everybody without royalty!! (W3C does not do F/RAND, patents submitted to W3C become royalty-free to everybody). If apple believes that a couple of its patents should not become free for everybody, it has every right to do so. They even did one month before the deadline. So, wht's the problem there?
But, the Motorola situation is different. Motorola Mobility agreed to give its patents to create a standard, and now that others have started using the standards, they are back tracking and suing them for using those standards. That is just unethical. I think you lack judgement to compare the two.
... Apple wants the right to sue over standards patents. ...
This is such an entirely dishonest misrepresentation of the facts by GG, especially within the context he attempts to portray it and equate it with that there is nothing to call it other than a lie.
Interesting how a skilled propagandist can, using only facts, construct a lie.
So then you strongly trust Mr. Mueller's opinions? Pretty simple question.
Oh, right, I forgot this part... He's always trashing "Mr. Mueller" when his arguments are counter to GG's purposes (although, he usually calls him Florian when he's trashing him) but now it's all about him being a respected source.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference.
Google are aligning themselves with Motorola's stance, refusing to commit to supporting the ideals that standards are based on.
As you brought up Linux I see Adobe is abandoning Flash for the platform.
your reply makes zero sense. Did you reply to the wrong message? Microsoft has a long history of abusing patents and its illegally obtained monopoly position to cripple innovation. If you are replying to my posts, at least try to read them first.
Microsoft aren't using standards based FRAND patents, Motorola is, therein lies the difference..
In reality they are. Here's where sleight of hand is advantageous. Simply transfer your FRAND-pledged essential patents to a 3rd party for a tiny fee with the requirement that they use them to sue others and split the money or they revert back. That's what Microsoft's trick is, and why they feel it's safe to say they won't sue over standards patents. Give them to MOSAID instead and obligate them to do the dirty work while letting MS claim to have clean hands.
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2012...g-company.html