Yes, another one of those: "LG signs Android, Chrome OS patent deal with Microsoft"

[brotkasten]

t’s been a couple of months since Microsoft has touted any new Android/Chrome OS vendors agreeing to license its patents. But that drought ended on January 12 with an announcement from the Softies regarding LG Electronics.

Microsoft and LG have signed a patent agreement covering LG’s tablets, mobile phones and other devices running Android or Chrome OS, according to a Microsoft press relealse. Terms of the deal between the two are not being disclosed.

Microsoft now has 11 patent-licensing deals with Android and Chrome OS makers , almost all (if not all) of which have agreed to pay Microsoft licensing fees for undisclosed Microsoft patents upon which Microsoft officials have said that Android and Chrome OS potentially infringe. Other Android/Chrome OS licensees of Microsoft’s patents include OEMs and ODMs Compal, HTC, Samsung, Quanta, Wistron,

Microsoft officials said as of today “more than 70 percent of all Android smartphones sold in the U.S. are now receiving coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio.”

Barnes & Noble and Motorola Mobility are currently fighting against licensing Microsoft’s patents for their Android-based products.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/lg-signs-android-chrome-os-patent-deal-with-microsoft/11636

REDMOND, Wash. — Jan. 12, 2012— Microsoft Corp. and LG Electronics have signed a patent agreement that provides broad coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio for LG’s tablets, mobile phones and other consumer devices running the Android or Chrome OS Platform. The contents of the agreement have not been disclosed.

“We are pleased to have built upon our longstanding relationship with LG to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. Together with our 10 previous agreements with Android and Chrome OS device manufacturers, including HTC, Samsung and Acer, this agreement with LG means that more than 70 percent of all Android smartphones sold in the U.S. are now receiving coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio,” said Horacio Gutierrez, corporate vice president and deputy general counsel, Intellectual Property Group at Microsoft. “We are proud of the continued success of our program in resolving the IP issues surrounding Android and Chrome OS.”

Microsoft’s Commitment to Licensing Intellectual Property

The agreement with LG expands upon a pre-existing agreement, and it is another example of the important role IP plays in ensuring a healthy and vibrant IT ecosystem. Since Microsoft launched its IP licensing program in December 2003, the company has entered into more than 1,100 licensing agreements and continues to develop programs that make it possible for customers, partners and competitors to access its IP portfolio. The program was developed to open access to Microsoft’s significant R&D investments and its growing, broad patent and IP portfolio.

More information about Microsoft’s licensing programs is available at http://www.microsoft.com/iplicensing/.

http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2012/jan12/01-12LGPR.mspx

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

And Microsoft continues to make more money... off of Android! Maybe some day they'll make as much off Windows Phone 7.

 

[JaggedSac]

So why do they all say "fuck it" with MS and pay up and then have crazy litigation with other patent disputes?

 

[The Faceless Master]

So why do they all say "fuck it" with MS and pay up and then have crazy litigation with other patent disputes?

microsoft must just have much better patents!

(or more agreeable secret licensing terms)

 

[entremet]

This is fucking bizarre. MS making so much money off Android. Kinda sad, really.

 

[AlteredBeast]

MS holds some major trump cards and is willing to do per-unit licensing, while a lot of other lawsuits seemingly look for multi-million dollar lump sums or banning an item.

 

[Azih]

So why do they all say "fuck it" with MS and pay up and then have crazy litigation with other patent disputes?

MS doesn't really care about exploiting these guys like a patent troll so the terms are probably really favourable. I think MS wants to use their patents to put pressure on Google/Android and pulling the cell phone makers that Google relies on onto Microsoft's side legally certainly does that.

 

[SimleuqiR]

MS doesn't really care about exploiting these guys like a patent troll so the terms are probably really favourable. I think MS wants to use their patents to put pressure on Google/Android and is pulling the cell phone makers that Google relies on onto Microsoft's side legally certainly does that.

True. But what happens if and when these "IPs" are worked around of on Android? What then? I think OEMs still find Android cheaper than going the MS route.

Edit:

Also, at least in the USA, OEMs do what the Carriers want. Carries want customization on their phones, this is not what MS is offering though.

I wish there was ONE Android UI and version to rule them all, but this is never going to happen. It is what has made Android the only other mobile OS that can keep up with iOS.

Edit:

HA! There is some trolling going on from the MS camp:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/12/following-lg-patent-deal-microsoft-execs-taunt-google-on-twitter/

Loving it.

Can we just agree to drop the patents-as-weapons meme? When effective licensing enables companies to share IP, the metaphor falls apart

It's time to recognize that in #patent world, lawsuits are the 1%; license agreements are the 99%. #anotherandroidlicense

 

[Patriots7]

I really want to know what patents Chrome OS is infringing. Microsoft talks more about Chrome OS than Google does for crying out loud.

It's really sad that Barnes and Noble is literally one of the few that are actually calling Microsoft out on this bullshit.

I'm just curious as to why Microsoft is so afraid to try this with Apple?

 

[Azih]

I really want to know what patents Chrome OS is infringing. Microsoft talks more about Chrome OS than Google does for crying out loud.

It's really sad that Barnes and Noble is literally one of the few that are actually calling Microsoft out on this bullshit.

I'm just curious as to why Microsoft is so afraid to try this with Apple?

I don't think it's the same situation. Google relies on Samsung/HTC/LG etc. which are independent entities which Microsoft can make separate deals with. Apple doesn't.

 

[Wiktor]

I'm just curious as to why Microsoft is so afraid to try this with Apple?

Becase Apple has their own patents? SO most likely it's the case of "you leave us alone and we do the same to you".

Google on the other hand just copied other people tech, ignored patents and then left all the phone makers to the wolves, not giving them any help or protection.

 

[kehs]

So why do they all say "fuck it" with MS and pay up and then have crazy litigation with other patent disputes?

Some companies prefer to not steal technology.

 

[Technosteve]

Android is open and free, but it'll cost you if you want to use it for commercial use.

 

[bigtroyjon]

I really want to know what patents Chrome OS is infringing. Microsoft talks more about Chrome OS than Google does for crying out loud.

It's really sad that Barnes and Noble is literally one of the few that are actually calling Microsoft out on this bullshit.

I'm just curious as to why Microsoft is so afraid to try this with Apple?

So what technology is Microsoft licensing out to these companies that you think is bullshit?

Microsoft and Apple had(might still have it, hard to find info) a long standing cross licensing deal that allows them use of each others patents on a wide variety of tech. One of the reasons people suspect that Nokia and Apple settled last summer was due to Nokia aligning with Windows Phone and the access to MS patents that allowed them.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

But Microsoft isn't evil anymore!

 

[Frustrated_me]

I thought this was hilarious...

 

[Patriots7]

Becase Apple has their own patents? SO most likely it's the case of "you leave us alone and we do the same to you".

Google on the other hand just copied other people tech, ignored patents and then left all the phone makers to the wolves, not giving them any help or protection.

Every single one of those companies that Microsoft has entered into these agreements have their own patents also.

Google transferred patents to HTC to help their case against Apple..how is that leaving HTC "to the wolves, not giving them any help or protection"?

This is really sad of Microsoft. It's more suspect what these licensees are agreeing to, because if it's anything like that of B&N, then Microsoft truly is attempting to stifle innovation.

http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=2011111122291296

 

[Wiktor]

But Microsoft isn't evil anymore!

Of course they aren't. They don't go around trying to ban competing devices. They just go and sign licensing deals.

 

[tfur]

Anyone ever get a list of what is "infringing"? Or is it another NDA meeting?

Its the same thing they did with Linux, and failed. I am glad to the see Barnes and Noble pressing this issue. Hopefully B&N goes all the way, and does not settle for an MS deal.

Nice Groklaw link about Nokia, MS and patent troll Mosaid ( Mosaid playing a similar roll as SCO played for Microsoft during the "we own linux" era.).

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120107171833225

I believe once the Motorola deal goes through, Google may start fisting some of these companies using their IBM and Motorola patents they purchased.

 

[Wiktor]

Every single one of those companies that Microsoft has entered into these agreements have their own patents also.

And this propably plays part in negotiating the licensing price. Paying for using other people's property is natural. I don't know why peope are acting like smartphone industry should be an exception to that.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

Anyone ever get a list of what is "infringing"? Or is it another NDA meeting?

Its the same thing they did with Linux, and failed. I am glad to the see Barnes and Noble pressing this issue. Hopefully B&N goes all the way, and does not settle for an MS deal.

Nice Groklaw link about Nokia, MS and patent troll Mosaid ( Mosaid playing a similar roll as SCO played for Microsoft during the "we own linux" era.).

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120107171833225

I believe once the Motorola deal goes through, Google may start fisting some of these companies using their IBM and Motorola patents they purchased.

Hopefully. Hopefully they can countersue or something too or something, that Twitter screenshot is really obnoxious. I can't believe they'd post stuff like that.

 

[bigtroyjon]

Every single one of those companies that Microsoft has entered into these agreements have their own patents also.

Google transferred patents to HTC to help their case against Apple..how is that leaving HTC "to the wolves, not giving them any help or protection"?

This is really sad of Microsoft. It's more suspect what these licensees are agreeing to, because if it's anything like that of B&N, then Microsoft truly is attempting to stifle innovation.

http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=2011111122291296

Obviously B&N's side of the case is the 100% absolute truth, good call.

 

[Patriots7]

And this propably plays part in negotiating the licensing price. Paying for using other people's property is natural. I don't know why peope are acting like smartphone industry should be an exception to that.

Read the Groklaw article. This isn't a simple licensing agreement that they're requesting. The validity of the patents are questionable at best. Certainly not enough to give Microsoft free reign on Android.

Obviously B&N's side of the case is the 100% absolute truth, good call.

Yep. B&N is going to the DoJ with lies. That's got to be the case.
Let's trust the side that's gloating about these licensing deals on twitter. That's got to be better and more accurate.

 

[brotkasten]

Read the Groklaw article. This isn't a simple licensing agreement that they're requesting. The validity of the patents are questionable at best. Certainly not enough to give Microsoft free reign on Android.

And yet most of the companies are paying. They even got Samsung.

 

[SRG01]

And yet most of the companies are paying. They even got Samsung.

Because the cost of litigation (along with the risk of losing!) is much higher than the cost of licensing.

 

[brotkasten]

Because the cost of litigation (along with the risk of losing!) is much higher than the cost of licensing.

If the patents really are that questionable, would there really be a risk of losing?

 

[bigtroyjon]

Because the cost of litigation (along with the risk of losing!) is much higher than the cost of licensing.

So why do all these companies keep going after each other in court and get products blocked?

 

[tfur]

Hopefully. Hopefully they can countersue or something too or something, that Twitter screenshot is really obnoxious. I can't believe they'd post stuff like that.

Its expected from Microsoft, as FUD is their business. Back when they tried to derail Linux from the server market (which they thankfully failed at), they would cover the internet with propaganda.

If the patents really are that questionable, would there really be a risk of losing?

Not familiar with how these cases go? They last forever and have their own business models for perpetuation. Look at the SCO bullshit. Cases from a decade+ ago are still alive.

Also, the lack of technical disclosure about these patents say a lot. Do any of these deals have details about what patents are being "violated"?

In the past, the Linux community and businesses burned Microsoft by asking for details publically...

Microsoft said:
"you guys are stealing, but we won't tell you what your are stealing"...

Linux related companies and business who use/sell Linux said:
"put up or shut up"

Microsoft failed to do so...
so basically a big FU to Microsoft...

Result:

Linux is now the backbone of the internet, financial sector/transactions, energy sector and more...

This time, MS is keeping things NDA, and using history of litigation as coercion to settle. They are avoiding Linux and the source code community, since they know they have nothing or what they have can be rewritten around. It's in their best interest to not expose what may be patent-able, since it would be mitigated and removed instantly from the code base.

It's also in Google's best interest to flounder on the releases of Android and slow its adoption... at least until all of their patent purchases are closed on.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

This time, MS is keeping things NDA, and using history of litigation as coercion to settle. They are avoiding Linux and the source code community, since they know they have nothing or what they have can be rewritten around. It's in their best interest to not expose what may be patent-able, since it would be mitigated and removed instantly from the code base.

It's also in Google's best interest to flounder on the releases of Android and slow its adoption... at least until all of their patent purchases are closed on.

Sounds like everybody wins! Thanks Microsoft.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I love GAF. If MS has sued these phone makers, we'd be screaming about them protecting their patents. Microsoft avoids lawsuits and settles on a license agreement, and now they're stifling innovation because they're charging the Android manufacturers for using the patents.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm sure MS extorting their own Windows Phone hardware partners for Android money is only increasing their motivation to support Windows Phone further in the future.

 

[Tobor]

I really want to know what patents Chrome OS is infringing. Microsoft talks more about Chrome OS than Google does for crying out loud.

It's really sad that Barnes and Noble is literally one of the few that are actually calling Microsoft out on this bullshit.

I'm just curious as to why Microsoft is so afraid to try this with Apple?

Apple and MS are already cross licensing some stuff. We don't know exactly what, the terms and details have never been disclosed.

 

[esquire]

I'm sure MS extorting their own Windows Phone hardware partners for Android money is only increasing their motivation to support Windows Phone further in the future.

If Android becomes too expensive to license they won't really have a choice.


Bill Gates didn't become wealthy by being nice.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

If Android becomes too expensive to license they won't really have a choice.


Bill Gates didn't become wealthy by being nice.

I can't wait to see what happens when the Google acquisition of Motorola closes. Motorola invented the modern cellular phone and holds many key patents to the basic hardware function of a cellular radio. I hope MS and Apple know what exactly they have started by trying to sue Android to death instead of compete with it, when Google sues back using Motorola's patents it's going to be a shitstorm.

 

[The Faceless Master]

If the patents really are that questionable, would there really be a risk of losing?

is it really the risk of losing or just the cost of litigating?

 

[Psychotext]

when Google sues back using Motorola's patents it's going to be a shitstorm.

It'll never happen. If they all go after each other that aggressively then everyone will end up having their products blocked from sale and no-one wins.

Each of them have enough patents to do serious damage to aspects of the functionality in the products of other companies. That's why cross licensing makes sense.

 

[Maxrunner]

Here are the six patents that Redmond is using to bully such companies as HTC, Samsung and Amazon:

Background image loading. This patent deals with an antiquated method of downloading an embedded background image. It is geared towards people using dial-up connections, which shows its age. It is a bit puzzling that it’s being applied to Android; last we checked the data rate for smartphones is well above 56Kbps.

Operating system provided tabs. Another head-scratcher here, Microsoft is saying that it has the rights to “tabs that work like dividers in a notebook” that are OS-generated. What’s interesting is IBM already proved this patent as invalid back in 1992 during the OS/2 days. Tabs are something that are present in all platforms on the market. Why wait until now to drag this dead horse back out?

Handles when selecting text. Are you beginning to see the pattern of ridiculousness here? Redmond’s lawyers are saying that they own the right to the handles that appear when a user selects text on a device. The problem with this one is that the patent does not provide the code that was used to achieve the handles — so who knows if B&N, or any other Android users, are actually infringing.

Annotation of electronic documents. This is the process of capturing annotations made in an e-book or similar document without changing the original copy. It sounds like Microsoft is losing a ton of money on this one.

Web browser loading status icons.

Simulating mouse inputs using non-mouse devices. So every touchscreen ever created should have to pay royalties or licensing fees to Microsoft.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/105113-microsofts-android-bullying-revealed-by-barnes-noble

 

[Cipherr]

And this propably plays part in negotiating the licensing price. Paying for using other people's property is natural. I don't know why peope are acting like smartphone industry should be an exception to that.

This, I love the Android OS, but if there are infringements, motherfuckers need to pay, period.

I don't understand people who oppose this. What is it that you want exactly? For stealing to be legal? Or for MS to push to BAN the products you like instead of cross licensing like sensible individuals have for decades? If the patents cant be upheld, then that will come to light the way it always does, in courts, but there's NOTHING wrong with signing deals like this.

Its the motherfuckers pushing for injunctions that make me sick.

 

[kehs]

This, I love the Android OS, but if there are infringements, motherfuckers need to pay, period.

I don't understand people who oppose this. What is it that you want exactly? For stealing to be legal? Or for MS to push to BAN the products you like instead of cross licensing like sensible individuals have for decades? If the patents cant be upheld, then that will come to light the way it always does, in courts, but there's NOTHING wrong with signing deals like this.

Its the motherfuckers pushing for injunctions that make me sick.

Because things like this:

Web browser loading status icons.

Shouldn't count as "intellectual property".

 

[tfur]

It'll never happen. If they all go after each other that aggressively then everyone will end up having their products blocked from sale and no-one wins.

Each of them have enough patents to do serious damage to aspects of the functionality in the products of other companies. That's why cross licensing makes sense.

I would not expect anyone to get products blocked in the U.S., and the temporary blocks that were done internationally say more to corporate influences.

There will be lawsuits to reduce or remove patent claims, and reduce or remove licensing claims. There will probably be lawsuits to start collecting in the other direction as well.

I am hoping that the full details of the NDA agreements become public.

 

[brotkasten]

is it really the risk of losing or just the cost of litigating?

And those costs would be higher than paying a fee for every device you sold? Especially for OEMs like Samsung or HTC, who sell millions of them? I don't know.

 

[Crazymoogle]

What is it that you want exactly?

To stop issuing software patents so long as it's dominated by obvious and duplicate patents.

You can see some of the ridiculous ones in this thread. Namco owns a patent on minigames during loading screens - something even an amateur coder could do.

This American Life on patent trolls.

 

[Psychotext]

You can see some of the ridiculous ones in this thread. Namco owns a patent on minigames during loading screens - something even an amateur coder could do.

I thought patents had more to do with an idea than how hard something is or is not to do?

Don't get me wrong, I think software patents are retarded (and if we had them in my country I couldn't do business), but that's aside from the point obviously.

 

[Somnid]

It's like protection money. Microsoft doesn't sue per-se but probably does a little bit of bullying but in exchange I'm fairly sure these agreements mean that MS will step in on behalf of the licensee if there is an outside dispute.

 

[King Of Fuh]

If Android becomes too expensive to license they won't really have a choice.


Bill Gates didn't become wealthy by being nice.

 

[Crazymoogle]

I thought patents had more to do with an idea than how hard something is or is not to do?

Sure, but we're in the whole realm of obvious vs. non-obvious. To a gamer, mini-games during a loading screen are obvious - loading screens are a technological relic and presumably players would rather play than wait. They've basically patented putting commercials before a movie.

Many of the most powerful patents right now are not about overarching software ideas like Shazam or something. They are for distinct processes that are a single building block to make common things. The fence isn't patented; the hinges are, basically.

The trolls win because they can just keep slamming the system with patents and eventually something will get through, made even easier as the US moves to first-to-file next year.