Where's GatorGuy? How many times has he run his trap claiming there's no "proof" MS actually collects royalties from Samsung (or anyone else) over MS IP in Android. Or that Android even infringes MS IP?
No, seriously, he has actually stated that numerous times. Would love to hear his spin on this case.
It is my observation that forum contrarians simply oppose whatever you say that happens to push their buttons on a particular thread, and over time, their body of posts winds up contradicting itself, sort of like the "continuity errors" that creep into long-running canons like Star Trek.
GatorGuy claims he's not a Samsung fan, so I conclude that the times he appears to "defend" Samsung is really just a reaction to people beating on Samsung, and if that is indeed his motivation, then he just might be a contrarian.
Where's GatorGuy? How many times has he run his trap claiming there's no "proof" MS actually collects royalties from Samsung (or anyone else) over MS IP in Android. Or that Android even infringes MS IP?
No, seriously, he has actually stated that numerous times. Would love to hear his spin on this case.
There's no proof that there are no secret government black helicopters either.
Doesn't Microsoft make more money in royalties that Samsung does in profits off of each cell phone? Seems I remember $10 a phone. That has got to really burn Sammy's nether regions... I suspect Sammy owes MS all of their declared profit and then some... Wait until the Samsung share holders get a whiff of this news!!
And here the fandroids always kept claiming it's just Apple that picks on poor Scamsung, and that Scamsung hasn't actually done anything. Now, here we have a scenario where they've signed a LEGAL CONTRACT with one of the largest, most power software companies in the world, and they are blatantly giving them the finger because they feel like it, coming up with the most ridiculous excuse ever.
This should be a huge red flag for Apple. Even if they ever negotiate a deal (which won't happen even after hell freezes over), that Scamsung will just renege on the contract, and stop adhering to the terms of that agreement, and go back to doing whatever the **** it wants, as it always does.
Hope SK's President Park goes after the chaebol of SK, starting with Samsung's controlling family, and put the country back in control of their people, and not these lying, thieving thugs ruining SK, and now the rest of the world.
Curiously, just after reading up a little more on this whole situation, it would appear the contract in question had a non-competition clause in it, and that's the excuse Samsung is using to not pay royalties, because they believe Microsoft is in violation here, and not them.
As Nokia is a smartphone maker that recently did make some Android devices, that would make them a competitor to Samsung, and as MS recently bought them, there is a potential for contract invalidation here.
What's scarier, is will Samsung then claim that because they previously had a patent licensing agreement, will they begin ripping off that IP from MS after a potential contract invalidation, once again bringing to bear, this time on Microsoft, their strategy of weaponizing patents and legal contracts?
This can also be contradicted though, as Windows Phone has technically been a competitor OS to Android since inception, and that being a supplier of a competitor OS, Samsung knew what they were signing on for.
This might actually turn into a bloody fight if MS doesn't get all its ducks into a row...
Curiously, just after reading up a little more on this whole situation, it would appear the contract in question had a non-competition clause in it, and that's the excuse Samsung is using to not pay royalties, because they believe Microsoft is in violation here, and not them.
As Nokia is a smartphone maker that recently did make some Android devices, that would make them a competitor to Samsung, and as MS recently bought them, there is a potential for contract invalidation here.
What's scarier, is will Samsung then claim that because they previously had a patent licensing agreement, will they begin ripping off that IP from MS after a potential contract invalidation, once again bringing to bear, this time on Microsoft, their strategy of weaponizing patents and legal contracts?
This can also be contradicted though, as Windows Phone has technically been a competitor OS to Android since inception, and that being a supplier of a competitor OS, Samsung knew what they were signing on for.
This might actually turn into a bloody fight if MS doesn't get all its ducks into a row...
Sammy isn't allowed to just decide when to stop paying. That's what the courts are for.
Sammy isn't allowed to just decide when to stop paying. That's what the courts are for.
Google makes no money on Android.
Having dug around the complaints by MS, there might be substance to this action. You have to keep in mind, this is Scamsung we are talking about here. If they smell even the slightest possibility of weaponizing this somehow to enable them to get out of paying the royalties, and perhaps even causing collateral damage to MS on the way out by invalidating some of their patent portfolio, those scum bags will take it.
Personally, I'm intending on watching this very closely. And while I don't normally root for anything Microsoft, GO GET EM!
Google is generally complicit in IP theft which is obvious from the first major android release that pissed of steve jobs so much.
The idea that they are allowed to do this scott-free because they don't make money off of it is ridiculous.
Agreed, they shouldn't be allowed to get away with this. Besides, the argument that Google doesn't make money off Android isn't exactly factual... They do make money off Android, via sales of Google Play apps and content, and more importantly, by the ad revenue it generates for them.
Out of morbid curiosity I went over to androidcentral.com to see what they were saying. The end of their article is hilarious:
"You have to think that if Samsung had any reason at all to think it was no longer required to pay licensing fees for each and every Android phone it sells, it would stop doing so — its responsibility to shareholders is to make as much money as possible, after all."
The comments are hilarious also. Some real Einsteins let me tell you.
Comments
It is my observation that forum contrarians simply oppose whatever you say that happens to push their buttons on a particular thread, and over time, their body of posts winds up contradicting itself, sort of like the "continuity errors" that creep into long-running canons like Star Trek.
GatorGuy claims he's not a Samsung fan, so I conclude that the times he appears to "defend" Samsung is really just a reaction to people beating on Samsung, and if that is indeed his motivation, then he just might be a contrarian.
Maybe they can get in on the Samsung legal-smackdown action.
Where's GatorGuy? How many times has he run his trap claiming there's no "proof" MS actually collects royalties from Samsung (or anyone else) over MS IP in Android. Or that Android even infringes MS IP?
No, seriously, he has actually stated that numerous times. Would love to hear his spin on this case.
There's no proof that there are no secret government black helicopters either.
Maybe they got him.
Finally.
Samsung is a shameful company. In what world would an acquisition mean that you no longer need to uphold your contracts?
I have no idea. Either Samsung have gone insane, or Microsoft writes the weirdest contracts I've ever heard of.
We can complete it.
"Interestingly, Samsung reported.." That they steal from everyone.
This should be a huge red flag for Apple. Even if they ever negotiate a deal (which won't happen even after hell freezes over), that Scamsung will just renege on the contract, and stop adhering to the terms of that agreement, and go back to doing whatever the **** it wants, as it always does.
Hope SK's President Park goes after the chaebol of SK, starting with Samsung's controlling family, and put the country back in control of their people, and not these lying, thieving thugs ruining SK, and now the rest of the world.
I am not understanding this... why is Samsung paying royalties to MS for using Android? Isn't Android made by Google? It makes no sense to me.
Your precious Android is made by Google, with large chunks of stolen IP.
Might wanna check this out:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/chinese-govt-reveals-microsofts-secret-list-of-android-killer-patents/
As Nokia is a smartphone maker that recently did make some Android devices, that would make them a competitor to Samsung, and as MS recently bought them, there is a potential for contract invalidation here.
What's scarier, is will Samsung then claim that because they previously had a patent licensing agreement, will they begin ripping off that IP from MS after a potential contract invalidation, once again bringing to bear, this time on Microsoft, their strategy of weaponizing patents and legal contracts?
This can also be contradicted though, as Windows Phone has technically been a competitor OS to Android since inception, and that being a supplier of a competitor OS, Samsung knew what they were signing on for.
This might actually turn into a bloody fight if MS doesn't get all its ducks into a row...
Cause Android uses stolen code and IP from Microsoft, that Microsoft proved was theirs, and now license that tech to anyone who uses Android.
Your precious Android is made by Google, with large chunks of stolen IP.
Might wanna check this out:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/chinese-govt-reveals-microsofts-secret-list-of-android-killer-patents/
Um, what makes you think I have Android? I never owned an Android device... I've always been an iPhone owner.
Why is MS demanding non-Google companies to pay royalties when Google is the guilty one owning stolen code? That's what I don't get it.
Sammy isn't allowed to just decide when to stop paying. That's what the courts are for.
Google makes no money on Android.
Oh dear!
Personally, I'm intending on watching this very closely. And while I don't normally root for anything Microsoft, GO GET EM!
The idea that they are allowed to do this scott-free because they don't make money off of it is ridiculous.
Samsungs defense will probably include:
We should only pay royalties on units sold, not units shipped
"You have to think that if Samsung had any reason at all to think it was no longer required to pay licensing fees for each and every Android phone it sells, it would stop doing so — its responsibility to shareholders is to make as much money as possible, after all."
The comments are hilarious also. Some real Einsteins let me tell you.