Microsoft claims Android patent licencing milestone

Apparently, half the Android OEMs have now signed up to Microsoft's patent protection scheme.

So at the front, we have MS making piles of money from Google's Android.

At the back we have Microsoft making piles of money from the Apple iCloud data centre.

Reminds me of the problems IBM faced with OS/2. Let's hope MS doesn't find themselves looking at Windows Phone and thinking, "Whatever we do, let's not upset the money cart."

Anyone here "in the MS camp" opposes this? 

@reply to post:Anyone here "in the "fanbaby camp" oppose this?

@reply to post:

true. I hope MS don't forget us and started to value their alternative customers more than us.

1 hour ago, fanbaby wrote

Anyone here "in the MS camp" opposes this? 

Opposed to patent holders collecting licensing fees from licensees? Why would anybody be opposed to that?

From an article in Daily Tech:

U.S. Patent No. 6,909,910 (Filed: 2002 Approved: 2005 Application: Mobile)
The utility covered in this patent is the adding of a contact, via your call history. Again, both Android and Apple appear to be in clear violation of this patent. Namely, in both operatings iOS and Android you can click a call from an unrecognized number and select to make it a contact, with the number prepopulated into a field in the contact card -- this is precisely what Microsoft's claims to have invented in this patent.

I take every word back. This is innovation. Thank you Microsoft for moving the industry forward.

Nice, that article actually went into describing the patents in that particular litigation and it turns out, bad evil Micro$haft actually has a case here! Who knew!

I liked this line, especially:

"Given the fundamental strength of the IP, it should be apparent now why so many big Android firms agreed to license."

But go ahead, fanbaby, and keep up the good fight!

1 day ago, PaoloM wrote

Nice, that article actually went into describing the patents in that particular litigation and it turns out, bad evil Micro$haft actually has a case here! Who knew!

Legally they have a case, but it's still dirty business to use patents like patent No. 6,909,910. Every time I watch C9 videos and see a softie with a stack of those black cubes my blood boils a little. A patentable idea should cost more than a million dollars to develop and require a team of researchers with PhD level of expertise. In the pharmaceutical industry patents serve some useful goal - to protect huge investments and it seems in software industry patents are used to dick around. During the normal course of development every phone makers would come to the same solution as described in 6,909,910, it's only a MS engineer, after falling of a chair one day, who thought that the idea is noteworthy enough to go smear sh!t in USPTO with it. For shame MS. 

1 hour ago, Royal​Schrubber wrote

*snip*

Legally they have a case, but it's still dirty business to use patents like patent No. 6,909,910. Every time I watch C9 videos and see a softie with a stack of those black cubes my blood boils a little.

*snip*

Take a chill pill, dude. Money's simply being pushed back and forth between faceless, multi-national mega-corporations, and you're taking it as a personal affront. 

Even though I hate many a Microsoft's actions, I felt bad when they were sued by some patent troll. A corporation may have biliions in cash, be "evil" and still by wronged. It's not just money changing hands.

 EDIT: minor things

1 day ago, Royal​Schrubber wrote

*snip*

Legally they have a case, but it's still dirty business to use patents like patent No. 6,909,910. Every time I watch C9 videos and see a softie with a stack of those black cubes my blood boils a little. A patentable idea should cost more than a million dollars to develop and require a team of researchers with PhD level of expertise. In the pharmaceutical industry patents serve some useful goal - to protect huge investments and it seems in software industry patents are used to dick around. During the normal course of development every phone makers would come to the same solution as described in 6,909,910, it's only a MS engineer, after falling of a chair one day, who thought that the idea is noteworthy enough to go smear sh!t in USPTO with it. For shame MS. 

A patentable idea should cost more than a million dollars to develop? What about the clever blokes working in their garages who may not have a million dollars to patent an idea? All that will happen is that a larger corporation will come along and steal the idea from them. I don't think money should be a barrier to creativity but I do think that you should have a working prototype before being allowed to patent something.