3 ms·

It's worth noting that it's very very close to the same tactic Microsoft pursued in targeting Android OEMs. Basically forcing them to sign non-disclosure agreem

by zmmmmm 14y ago

It's worth noting that it's very very close to the same tactic Microsoft pursued in targeting Android OEMs. Basically forcing them to sign non-disclosure agreements before letting them even know which patents they violated. Then when Barnes and Noble finally refused and forced (some of) the patents into the open something like 90% of them were found to be bogus. But this was after dozens of OEMs were extorted into licensing these dodgy patents based on the up front NDA. This one act of Microsoft's has made it very hard for me to buy any of their products. I feel like I'm funding a patent extortionist (I would call them a "troll" but I know many people would nitpick the definition of that).

recoiledsnake 14y ago
>something like 90% of them were found to be bogus Reference?
- zmmmmm 14y ago
  Partly, Microsoft themselves since they withdrew significant parts their patent claim pretty much as soon as they were forced to make them public: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-withdraws-one-patent-from-barnes-and-noble-android-case/11618 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-withdraws-one-... But you can judge for yourself: "Loading status in a hypermedia browser having a limited available display area": http://www.google.com/patents?id=DwEJAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents?id=DwEJAAAAEBAJ "Remote retrieval and display management of electronic document with embedded images": http://www.google.com/patents/about/5778372_Remote_retrieval_and_display_man.html?id=deQCAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/5778372_Remote_retrieval... "System provided child window controls": http://www.google.com/patents/about/5889522_System_provided_child_window_con.html?id=JvQAAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/5889522_System_provided_... "Selection handles in editing electronic documents" http://www.google.com/patents/about/6891551_Selection_handles_in_editing_ele.html?id=oKgVAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/6891551_Selection_handle... Take the "loading status" one for instance: the entire patent consists of displaying an animated graphic while a page loads and then removing the animated graphic afterwards. That's supposed to be an invention worthy of protection because otherwise Microsoft might keep its implementation secret, thus the public should wait 20 years to use it. In my view, that is exactly the kind of patent that makes a mockery of the patent system.
raverbashing 14y ago
"something like 90% of them were found to be bogus. But this was after dozens of OEMs were extorted into licensing these dodgy patents" No, what happens is Most of the company directors/managers doesn't know much about patents. They think it's a magical thing and that if MS is saying that we violate them it's better to pay them because MS invented computers or something. I'm not making this up. So then came B&N that apparently knows a bit more about patents and call their BS.

by zmmmmm 14y ago

recoiledsnake 14y ago

>something like 90% of them were found to be bogus Reference?

zmmmmm 14y ago
Partly, Microsoft themselves since they withdrew significant parts their patent claim pretty much as soon as they were forced to make them public: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-withdraws-one-patent-from-barnes-and-noble-android-case/11618 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-withdraws-one-... But you can judge for yourself: "Loading status in a hypermedia browser having a limited available display area": http://www.google.com/patents?id=DwEJAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents?id=DwEJAAAAEBAJ "Remote retrieval and display management of electronic document with embedded images": http://www.google.com/patents/about/5778372_Remote_retrieval_and_display_man.html?id=deQCAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/5778372_Remote_retrieval... "System provided child window controls": http://www.google.com/patents/about/5889522_System_provided_child_window_con.html?id=JvQAAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/5889522_System_provided_... "Selection handles in editing electronic documents" http://www.google.com/patents/about/6891551_Selection_handles_in_editing_ele.html?id=oKgVAAAAEBAJ http://www.google.com/patents/about/6891551_Selection_handle... Take the "loading status" one for instance: the entire patent consists of displaying an animated graphic while a page loads and then removing the animated graphic afterwards. That's supposed to be an invention worthy of protection because otherwise Microsoft might keep its implementation secret, thus the public should wait 20 years to use it. In my view, that is exactly the kind of patent that makes a mockery of the patent system.

raverbashing 14y ago

"something like 90% of them were found to be bogus. But this was after dozens of OEMs were extorted into licensing these dodgy patents" No, what happens is Most of the company directors/managers doesn't know much about patents. They think it's a magical thing and that if MS is saying that we violate them it's better to pay them because MS invented computers or something. I'm not making this up. So then came B&N that apparently knows a bit more about patents and call their BS.