3 ms·

Not only PC's. They tried to eliminate as many Android OEM's as possible by threating and launching patent litigation against them unless they paid up. The amou

by kernal 3y ago

Not only PC's. They tried to eliminate as many Android OEM's as possible by threating and launching patent litigation against them unless they paid up. The amount they demanded from each device was so ridiculous that you would have thought it was a payment to license the Android OS itself. Thugs will always be thugs.

robertlagrant 3y ago
Well, I remember they had the FAT patent, which each Android device needed. Was it more than that?
- kernal 3y ago
  >The disclosure by MOFCOM on April 8, 2014 is a direct result of Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia’s mobile handset unit as that deal required approval by the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of MOFCOM. The disclosed lists were part of the antitrust review. >Of the two lists of Microsoft patents disclosed by MOFCOM2, one was a list of 310 patents which included 73 "standard-essential” patents (SEPs) for smartphones; 127 patents which are “implemented in Android”; and 110 “nonstandard-essential” patents and applications (non-SEPs). This list is referred to as Annex “B” by Microsoft.3 The second list is identical to the non-SEP set minus one issued patent, U.S. Patent No.7,111,039. This list is referred to as Annex “A”. https://www.m-cam.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/patently_obvious_microsoft_android_license.pdf https://www.m-cam.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/patently_ob...
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > With this disclosure, China may be attempting to counteract Microsoft’s chokehold on the smartphone market This is a very strange statement! But thanks - appreciate the link. Not sure how the "media player in the taskbar" got in there, but that's patents for you.
    - kernal 3y ago
      At the time Microsoft was strong-arming every Android OEM into paying royalty payments or else. Samsung paid more than a billion dollars to Microsoft in royalty payments for those questionable patents. I'd call that a chokehold. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29505439 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29505439

by kernal 3y ago

robertlagrant 3y ago

Well, I remember they had the FAT patent, which each Android device needed. Was it more than that?

kernal 3y ago
>The disclosure by MOFCOM on April 8, 2014 is a direct result of Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia’s mobile handset unit as that deal required approval by the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of MOFCOM. The disclosed lists were part of the antitrust review. >Of the two lists of Microsoft patents disclosed by MOFCOM2, one was a list of 310 patents which included 73 "standard-essential” patents (SEPs) for smartphones; 127 patents which are “implemented in Android”; and 110 “nonstandard-essential” patents and applications (non-SEPs). This list is referred to as Annex “B” by Microsoft.3 The second list is identical to the non-SEP set minus one issued patent, U.S. Patent No.7,111,039. This list is referred to as Annex “A”. https://www.m-cam.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/patently_obvious_microsoft_android_license.pdf https://www.m-cam.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/patently_ob...
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > With this disclosure, China may be attempting to counteract Microsoft’s chokehold on the smartphone market This is a very strange statement! But thanks - appreciate the link. Not sure how the "media player in the taskbar" got in there, but that's patents for you.
  - kernal 3y ago
    At the time Microsoft was strong-arming every Android OEM into paying royalty payments or else. Samsung paid more than a billion dollars to Microsoft in royalty payments for those questionable patents. I'd call that a chokehold. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29505439 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29505439