|
Junior Member
(05-02-2012, 01:16 PM)
|
#53
Originally Posted by FOSS Patents:
EDIT: From the Twitter Feed "Products presently banned in Germany by the Mannheim court include Windows 7, Xbox 360, all iPhones, all iPads, all Nokia and all HTC phones" |
|
GAF parliamentarian
(05-02-2012, 01:38 PM)
|
#56
I'm glad my "German courts the Texas of Europe" search came up with an informative and on-topic article:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...n-center.shtml |
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:00 PM)
|
#58
Basically it's saying don't do X until we do Y under our (US Legal System) control over you (Motorola). |
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:06 PM)
|
#60
|
|
(05-02-2012, 02:07 PM)
|
#61
Software patents FTW.
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:07 PM)
|
#62
Quote:
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:15 PM)
|
#64
Probably late: US Courts don't over-ride German courts, but for multi-national organizations like Microsoft and Motorola, they can't act with legal independence in specific countries that have differently defined laws without also having those issues come to a head in other countries. A US Court is saying, "hold on Motorola," and Motorola -- as a multi-national organization -- is following their best interest by "holding on." Not only that, but Microsoft can appeal, and this would probably take effect like 5+ years after the ruling, even if the appeal was upheld. With major companies and major products, these always end in settlements or international agreements (ie, Microsoft can license the Motorola product in their next console for $X agreement).
This isn't US superceding German courts, it's international business, and both companies have international interests. *edit* For the cynics: The same idea protects, say, European stakeholders who hold stock in primarily American companies that merge... This is why the EU can reject a major acquisitions and prevent the merger in the United States, despite both companies being primarily American companies. It's not that European courts would be over-ruling American law or American courts, but rather, that both companies have European interests, and have to consider them for their best interest as multi-national organizations.. And, again, this wouldn't be a ban in Germany. Even if the ruling were upheld, which it probably wouldn't be, it would result in a nominal settlement.
Last edited by The Albatross; 05-02-2012 at 02:22 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:22 PM)
|
#67
|
|
Junior Member
(05-02-2012, 02:25 PM)
|
#68
How is this a totally different thing?
If anything this is an actual patent, covering something that actually imrpoves technology, as opposed to the 50 'swipe' patents that android is getting sued over. And, microsoft just bought a couple patents from AOL for 1 billion, its not like 4 billion is that much. The whole system is stupid, but saying 'this is more stupid' is ridiculous when its simply how the crap goes down mojumbo. |
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:32 PM)
|
#69
|
|
(05-02-2012, 02:42 PM)
|
#72
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:47 PM)
|
#77
This is not unexpected. Everyone knows that Microsoft is infringing on these patents, because they are part of the h264 standard. The problem is that the standards body only included the technology in the standard because Motorola agreed to license them on FRAND terms (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) and they are doing nothing of the sort.
Also, Google plans to continue Motorola's crusade of suing people over standards-essential patents. |
|
I got d 2 tha eepdicked
d-e-e-p-d-i-c-k-e-d (05-02-2012, 02:50 PM)
|
#78
Yeah, I still don't understand how it is up to Motorola. Now that the court has ruled, surely German companies/distributers/whatever have to comply? I think I don't understand who this is a ban from the court, but not a ban.
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:50 PM)
|
#79
lets not get stupid here... there is absolutely nothing vague about these patents. They should be licensed under FRAND, but these aren't "swipe your finger to move the screen" patents.
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:52 PM)
|
#80
and it's different because Microsoft never agreed to license their patents to the infringing phone makers. Motorola agreed to license their patents to anyone on FRAND terms. |
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:53 PM)
|
#81
Maybe microsoft and other companies want free use of those patents.
Im not sure but if there is a android manufactor that has to pay like 10~1000 times more then the rest to microsoft that would be the same case if im not mistaken. |
|
(05-02-2012, 02:53 PM)
|
#82
As to why these requirements are the way they are, that's better left to the guys who actually know what they're talking about like Phisheep. :p |
|
Junior Member
(05-02-2012, 02:58 PM)
|
#83
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 02:59 PM)
|
#84
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:00 PM)
|
#85
|
|
I got d 2 tha eepdicked
d-e-e-p-d-i-c-k-e-d (05-02-2012, 03:12 PM)
|
#86
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:13 PM)
|
#87
|
|
(05-02-2012, 03:16 PM)
|
#88
Welcome to the wonderful world of international business law. It's a right clusterfuck and rarely makes sense when looking in from the outside. (At least to me it doesn't.)
|
|
GAF parliamentarian
(05-02-2012, 03:19 PM)
|
#89
Microsoft makes ~400 million off of the massive number of Android devices yearly (for a very very large number of parents). 4 billion per year for a playback decoder (less than 70 patents, I think?) is a bit different.
One is reasonable licensing, the other is insanity. I guess Germany ignored that.
Last edited by erpg; 05-02-2012 at 03:22 PM.
|
|
I got d 2 tha eepdicked
d-e-e-p-d-i-c-k-e-d (05-02-2012, 03:27 PM)
|
#90
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:29 PM)
|
#91
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:38 PM)
|
#92
![]() thats 2 paragraphs out 28 pages (some of it is in other languages). There is also 7-8 pages of diagrams of how it works.
Last edited by gcubed; 05-02-2012 at 03:44 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:45 PM)
|
#93
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 03:51 PM)
|
#95
No they didn't. FFS people should really read the stuff that came before.
|
|
I got d 2 tha eepdicked
d-e-e-p-d-i-c-k-e-d (05-02-2012, 04:09 PM)
|
#97
|
|
Member
(05-02-2012, 04:10 PM)
|
#98
Large computer and electronic companies are going to send us all back to the stone age through patent infringement lawsuits.
But anyway, if it is just for H.264 video coding and playback, I'm sure MS could find a work around for that. Or settle it outside of court. |