Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents • Hacker News Board

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#21

Post by cooldeal » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 4:17 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #18

VengefulCynic wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're getting hot and bothered about legal arguments that just aren't there. Other than alleging antitrust implications by Nokia and Microsoft cross-licensing patents from (between them) a dominant position in the mobile phone industry, there aren't any legal arguments about monopolies in this filing. 98% of this filing is about misapplication of patent law and bad patents. This has nothing to do with anti-trust oth…

Well I'd agree with you if not for the fact that Groklaw made anti-trust the central thesis of their blog entry, which is the article this thread is referring to. Here's Groklaw's concluding sentence: "You know how for years I've told you that I expected that one day Microsoft's anti-Linux patent threats would be an antitrust matter? That day has come, at last, and while others have apparently caved to Microsoft, Bar…

Sadly, Groklaw seems to have turned into a cesspool of Microsoft haters. Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS. It's doubly sad because it's such a good resource otherwise.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#22

Post by cooldeal » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 4:21 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #10

kenjackson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a stretch. Especially since the largest players over to past decade haven't been attacked in this way by MS... Apple, Palm, RIM. In the tablet space even Android is a niche player compared to the iPad. Additionally until recently the Nook was pretty much just an eReader, with the most popular software client running on Windows. My point is this is a stretch, like any good conspiracy theory.

The fact Android is a niche player in the current market is more or less irrelevant. What's relevant is the desktop market will become less and less important because of a shift towards server-based computing and mobile (or thin) clients. This threatens the survival of Microsoft like no previous player (like you mentioned, Apple, Palm and RIM) did and that alone is enough to explain Microsoft's lack of action at the…

>Mobile devices and easy connectivity signal the end of the only market Microsoft has been able to dominate completely.

Mobile devices signal the end of PC? I see you have bought this Post-PC bs hook, line and sinker. PCs are going to be important for quite a while, I don't see many people replacing their PCs with tablets or phones, they seem to be just using it as an additional device.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#23

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 5:20 PM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #22

rbanffy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact Android is a niche player in the current market is more or less irrelevant. What's relevant is the desktop market will become less and less important because of a shift towards server-based computing and mobile (or thin) clients. This threatens the survival of Microsoft like no previous player (like you mentioned, Apple, Palm and RIM) did and that alone is enough to explain Microsoft's lack of action at the…

>Mobile devices and easy connectivity signal the end of the only market Microsoft has been able to dominate completely. Mobile devices signal the end of PC? I see you have bought this Post-PC bs hook, line and sinker. PCs are going to be important for quite a while, I don't see many people replacing their PCs with tablets or phones, they seem to be just using it as an additional device.

> PCs are going to be important for quite a while

Like trucks remain important today. We will have a lot of other information processing/retrieval devices around us. Up to now, we had mostly one type. Shortly, we'll have a far more diverse ecosystem.

> I don't see many people replacing their PCs with tablets or phones

Don't look to PCs if you want to see people replacing them. Look at people who prefer to do their scheduling or e-mail on phones or their reading on tablets.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#24

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 5:25 PM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #15

rbanffy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intent is important. Microsoft is using those patents to disrupt an ecosystem it deems threatening to its need to (illegally) leverage its desktop OS monopoly into the mobile space in order to gain market share there. Android is a threat to Microsoft's desktop market because it furthers the trend away from PCs and towards mobile devices. Microsoft is also using its "war chest" to threaten less well financed players w…

>its need to (illegally) leverage its desktop OS monopoly into the mobile space in order to gain market share there Huh, how can that happen? Is MS forcing PC OEMs to bundle Windows Phones with their PCs? If intent is important, then all of Apple's lawsuits against Android will be thrown out, since Apple can be construed as trying to gain a monopoly in the mobile phone market. >Oh yes, I am criticizing Microsoft. Let…

> Is MS forcing PC OEMs to bundle Windows Phones with their PCs?

AFAIK (everything under NDAs) HTC's deal to make WP7 phones along their Android ones reduced the cost of their settlement. Dell selling WP7 phones has, probably, some impact on their OEM license costs.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#25

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 5:37 PM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #21

kenjackson wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I'd agree with you if not for the fact that Groklaw made anti-trust the central thesis of their blog entry, which is the article this thread is referring to. Here's Groklaw's concluding sentence: "You know how for years I've told you that I expected that one day Microsoft's anti-Linux patent threats would be an antitrust matter? That day has come, at last, and while others have apparently caved to Microsoft, Bar…

Sadly, Groklaw seems to have turned into a cesspool of Microsoft haters. Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS. It's doubly sad because it's such a good resource otherwise.

> Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS

Have you taken the trouble of actually reading the patents?

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#26

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 5:42 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #11

nobodyspecial wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ahh, but it's not that MS IS a monopoly in the market, it's that MS is using a current monopoly to leverage into another market.

But licensing or suing isn't leveraging their current monopoly. They aren't blocking Android from syncing on Windows. They're not blocking the Nook client from working on Windows. They're not bundling WP with Windows. They're suing over patents. Last I checked even monopolies could sue over patent infringement. If BN asserted they were actually using their monopoly power then that would be one thing. But simply asser…

> But licensing or suing isn't leveraging their current monopoly

Using the income from monopoly A for threatening to drag players in market B (that's about to become more relevant than monopoly A) into legal wars that only the plaintiff can afford is... well... shady.

> They're suing over patents. Last I checked even monopolies could sue over patent infringement.

Unless they are using those patents to prevent competitors from competing with them. If you consider the mobile ecosystem as competition to the desktop ecosystem, you can argue they are leveraging a monopoly (because the monopolist in segment A can afford a legal battle nobody in segment B can) to prevent it from being rendered worthless by a segment they can't monopolize.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#27

Post by kenjackson » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 5:52 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #25

cooldeal wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, Groklaw seems to have turned into a cesspool of Microsoft haters. Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS. It's doubly sad because it's such a good resource otherwise.

> Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS Have you taken the trouble of actually reading the patents? http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect…

I had done a brief look at these patents in a previous thread. I do find some of them pretty compelling, if they do survive invalidation attempts.

Ironically, if MS loses their current case in the Supreme Court, the bar for B&N will be extremely high (the current standard is clear and convincing).

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#28

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 6:26 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #27

rbanffy wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can't really hope for any impartiality when it comes to reporting on MS Have you taken the trouble of actually reading the patents? http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect…

I had done a brief look at these patents in a previous thread. I do find some of them pretty compelling, if they do survive invalidation attempts. Ironically, if MS loses their current case in the Supreme Court, the bar for B&N will be extremely high (the current standard is clear and convincing).

It never crossed my mind they could lose on purpose. Until now.

Considering the size of the desktop market and the size of the mobile market a few years from now, they could, very well, sacrifice one for the other.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#29

Post by naner » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 7:00 PM UTC

From the layman free-software nerd point of view, this appears to be exactly what is happening in a number of situations. This is a way to assign a cost to your competitors who are giving away solutions for free.

1) Microsoft approaches companies using Linux. They claim they have patents that Linux infringes. Either pay Microsoft's licensing fee (Amazon) or get sued (TomTom). Now Linux isn't free. This has been going on for years, long before Android.

2) MPEG-LA looks to be considering the same path with the WebM patent-pool they are forming. I assume they will start using this same pitch on smaller companies once WebM starts being used more.

3) Both Apple and Microsoft are going after Android in this manner.

It is a brilliant strategy that exploits shortcomings of the patent system. You get paid for allowing people to use your competitors' free solutions or, at the very least, the free solutions end up having legal fees associated with them. The only downside is negative publicity among certain groups of customers.

Re: Barnes & Noble Charges Microsoft with Misusing Patents

#30

Post by mvalle » Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 7:16 PM UTC

I love reading software patents. From the article:

32. Of the patents Microsoft threatened Barnes & Noble with in the past, Microsoft has only sued Microsoft on the ’780 patent. Barnes & Noble denies that the accused NookTM and Nook ColorTM devices infringe any valid, enforceable claim of the ’780 patent. The ’780 patent appears to cover nothing more than placing a loading status icon in the content viewing area of a browser. In that patent, Microsoft concedes that loading status icons and content viewing areas of a browser were both known in the prior art. The prior art placed the loading status icon outside of the viewing area, but it is nothing short of obvious to place it in the content viewing area (since there are only two locations for such an icon—either in or out of the content viewing area).