Microsoft vs Samsung - Microsoft suing for unpaid patent royalties
22 replies, posted
[t]http://images.bidnessetc.com/img/1177967c7957072da3dc1db4ceb30e7a-microsoft-sues-samsung-over-missed-android-patent-royalties.jpg[/t]
[quote]After trying to resolve the issue out of court for months, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) filed a patent-royalty suit in the US District Court in the Southern District of New York on Friday, against Samsung Electronics (SSNLF). The complaint was in response to Samsung missing on a recent royalty payment over patent licensing and then refusing to pay any interest over the missed payment.
In 2011, the two technology giants signed a deal according to which Samsung was liable to pay an undisclosed amount to Microsoft for each Android device it sells. The royalty payment was to be made in return for using several of Microsoft’s patents in Google Inc.’s (GOOGL) Android operating system such as the display of multiple windows in the web browser.
But Samsung has argued that the deal signed in 2011, was effectively void as Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia’s (NOK) handset unit last year violated the terms of the licensing contract and other business agreements because of which it was not entitled to pay further royalties to Microsoft.
However, Microsoft contends that its acquisition of Nokia has not violated any terms of the earlier agreement. David Howard, deputy general counsel and corporate vice president of Microsoft, said that Samsung has refused to make the higher royalty payments as its smartphone sales have risen drastically since it signed the agreement. Microsoft says that according to the terms of the licensing agreement, the royalty payments were expected to go up as unit sales increased, and Samsung was clearly violating the deal.[/quote]
[url]http://www.bidnessetc.com/23524-microsoft-sues-samsung-over-missed-android-patent-royalties/[/url]
I knew it's it has been too long when I haven't heard any new patent lawsuits involving smartphones in the last few months.
Suck it Samsung, after you decided that you'd completely lock down your phones you deserve this shit. You're as bad as Apple.
[QUOTE]In 2011, the two technology giants signed a deal according to which Samsung was liable to pay an undisclosed amount to Microsoft for each Android device it sells. The royalty payment was to be made in return for using several of Microsoft’s patents in Google Inc.’s (GOOGL) Android operating system [B]such as the display of multiple windows in the web browser.[/B][/QUOTE]
Ugh.
Shouldn't the patent system apply to methods of operation as opposed to the result?
That's the way I see it, anyway.
[QUOTE=TheWindow;45576577]Ugh.
Shouldn't the patent system apply to methods of operation as opposed to the result?
That's the way I see it, anyway.[/QUOTE]
Design patents are fucking retarded, more at 11
[QUOTE=TheWindow;45576577]Ugh.
Shouldn't the patent system apply to methods of operation as opposed to the result?
That's the way I see it, anyway.[/QUOTE]
It depends - the patent itself might be composed of both while the article merely quotes the result.
[QUOTE=draugur;45576305]Suck it Samsung, after you decided that you'd completely lock down your phones you deserve this shit. You're as bad as Apple.[/QUOTE]
Wait what are you talking about? I was thinking about getting a sasmung phone. One of the new ones.
[QUOTE=draugur;45576305]Suck it Samsung, after you decided that you'd completely lock down your phones you deserve this shit. You're as bad as Apple.[/QUOTE]
Care to elaborate? this is the first I've heard of this.
[QUOTE=nemmises5;45581048]Care to elaborate? this is the first I've heard of this.[/QUOTE]
They lock the boot loader on their phones to prevent you from running a custom rom as well as locking your ability to root the phone, the latter has been circumvented on most phones but with locked boot loaders we see no progress still. Luckily the government recently made it so we could legally modify our phones but knowing Samsung, they'll still keep this shit locked down tight.
The note 3 and galaxy s5 are both completely locked down iirc.
[QUOTE=draugur;45584841]They lock the boot loader on their phones to prevent you from running a custom rom as well as locking your ability to root the phone, the latter has been circumvented on most phones but with locked boot loaders we see no progress still. Luckily the government recently made it so we could legally modify our phones but knowing Samsung, they'll still keep this shit locked down tight.
The note 3 and galaxy s5 are both completely locked down iirc.[/QUOTE]
That's an absolutely retarded move. Wonder who at samsung thought it was a good idea and why.
[QUOTE=draugur;45576305]Suck it Samsung, after you decided that you'd completely lock down your phones you deserve this shit. You're as bad as Apple.[/QUOTE]
Look dude, there are pros and cons for both having a proprietary environment and one where you can do whatever you want. Samsung wants a place where they can control the flow of apps. They're not using their own OS for this because if they were, I bet you'd be the first person to say that they should adopt the standard.
It's not like there aren't other Android phones. You can't approach everything you take issue with as if the world should just conform to your preferences.
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45584926]Look dude, there are pros and cons for both having a proprietary environment and one where you can do whatever you want. Samsung wants a place where they can control the flow of apps. They're not using their own OS for this because if they were, I bet you'd be the first person to say that they should adopt the standard.
It's not like there aren't other Android phones. You can't approach everything you take issue with as if the world should just conform to your preferences.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah I totally forgot how even though I bought the phone and it's my property so I should be free to do with it as I please doesn't apply because "there are pros to it". Bet you're fine with them locking phones to specific carriers as well hmm?
Just because you don't understand how the phone works and don't want/need to be able to use it in a different way than the manufacturer wants you to, doesn't mean I should be forced to as well. Maybe you shouldn't approach something you don't understand as if the world should conform to your preferences?
Maladroit, are you high? Pros to locking bootloader for android phone? Haha what a joke
[QUOTE=draugur;45585166]Oh yeah I totally forgot how even though I bought the phone and it's my property so I should be free to do with it as I please doesn't apply because "there are pros to it". Bet you're fine with them locking phones to specific carriers as well hmm?
Just because you don't understand how the phone works and don't want/need to be able to use it in a different way than the manufacturer wants you to, doesn't mean I should be forced to as well. Maybe you shouldn't approach something you don't understand as if the world should conform to your preferences?[/QUOTE]
Motherfucker that's why there are other android phones that don't restrict you to it.
[editline]3rd August 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45585175]Maladroit, are you high? Pros to locking bootloader for android phone? Haha what a joke[/QUOTE]
More uniform OS design and a more accessible experience to people who aren't deep in to phones. I hate to tell you this, but not everyone is the same as you.
It's samsung's phones, they can do what they want.
It's not that hard of a concept to grasp that there can be rules or restrictions to things you buy.
[QUOTE=draugur;45584841]They lock the boot loader on their phones to prevent you from running a custom rom as well as locking your ability to root the phone, the latter has been circumvented on most phones but with locked boot loaders we see no progress still. Luckily the government recently made it so we could legally modify our phones but knowing Samsung, they'll still keep this shit locked down tight.
The note 3 and galaxy s5 are both completely locked down iirc.[/QUOTE]
Actually the galaxy S5 has been rooted recently thanks to an exploit by Geohot. Unless they've patched the kernel vulnerability which made it possible. I don't know the specifics regarding the note 3.
It's also worthy of note that, although Samsung IS responsible for locking the bootloaders on their recent phones, they've only done so at the request of Verizon and AT&T. Non verizon and AT&T S5s come with an unlocked bootloader IIRC. Not saying that it washes them of responsibility, but it's an interesting point.
[editline]3rd August 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45584860]That's an absolutely retarded move. Wonder who at samsung thought it was a good idea and why.[/QUOTE]
I figure it was some kind of corporate deal with carriers, really. Considering the fact that it's only Verizon and AT&T for the S5.
TL;DR summary of what's happening, with some history:
What happened here is that a bunch of companies got bullied into paying Microsoft because they had tons of patents.
Then Microsoft went to Samsung and said you should also pay royalties for our patents, because everyone else is doing it, and Samsung made a contract with Microsoft.
Never, at any point, were the patents revealed to the other parties, but a while ago, the Chinese government forced Microsoft to reveal the patents in question, and a third party went through the patents, and found pretty much all of them to be irrelevant.
So, the patents Microsoft has probably can't be used for bullying new companies into giving Microsoft money, but Samsung's in trouble because they made a contract with Microsoft, and it's irrelevant if the patents hold any meaning after you've made a contract about it.
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585182]
More uniform OS design and a more accessible experience to people who aren't deep in to phones. I hate to tell you this, but not everyone is the same as you.
It's samsung's phones, they can do what they want.
It's not that hard of a concept to grasp that there can be rules or restrictions to things you buy.[/QUOTE]How is unlocked bootloader preventing any of this? Do you even have any idea what you're talking about?
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45585215]How is unlocked bootloader preventing any of this? Do you even have any idea what you're talking about?[/QUOTE]
Obviously he thinks that technically inept people are going to accidentally install a custom ROM.
It's a legitimate concern, really.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45585215]How is unlocked bootloader preventing any of this? Do you even have any idea what you're talking about?[/QUOTE]
Look what samsung wants to to with their products, they can do. Arguing about it on the internet isn't going to change anything.
Do you really think there's some samsung exec reading this thread right now going "You know, I was for closed platforms before but this guy saying we suck really turned me around."
You can not buy it, but goddamn people that just need everything to be open are the only people I've ever seen that actively whine and complain about shit [I]they don't even own[/I]
Leaving holes open for people to install custom bootloaders which could be used to install pirated software and do illegal stuff is pretty questionable. It's probably just a move to cover Samsung's ass more than anything. Also it was done at the request of the networks, they're not just sitting around thinking of ways to rape customers, that's comcast.
I just don't understand, if it comes to misundertading like this, why don't they just drop contracts and shake-hands.
Noooo, they have to fuck each other.
Fucking Microsoft
[editline]4th August 2014[/editline]
I know it's $$$ @ work, but still.. meh
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585182]Motherfucker that's why there are other android phones that don't restrict you to it.
[editline]3rd August 2014[/editline]
More uniform OS design and a more accessible experience to people who aren't deep in to phones. I hate to tell you this, but not everyone is the same as you.
It's samsung's phones, they can do what they want.
It's not that hard of a concept to grasp that there can be rules or restrictions to things you buy.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585182]Motherfucker
[/quote]
Nice and polite.
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585182]
More uniform OS design and a more accessible experience to people who aren't deep in to phones. I hate to tell you this, but not everyone is the same as you.
[/quote]
If you knew what you were talking about, you'd understand why this is dumb. If you want uniform OS design you'd be more mad than I am because I can 100% tell you that between all the major phone brands they all have their specific custom alterations to the Android OS, Samsung has TouchWiz as their proprietary add-on, stuff like that. That's pretty far from uniform. On top of that base Android as an OS is developed by Google.
This is 100% about hardware, and I didn't pay $700 for a locked and shit device. Would you be upset if you bought a high performance sports car and the manufacturer locked it down on the firmware side so you couldn't install a custom tape deck or after-market speakers. It's nothing that hurts the "average user" but you bought the fucking car, it's your car, you can do with it as you please.
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585182]
It's not that hard of a concept to grasp that there can be rules or restrictions to things you buy.[/QUOTE]
It is when these rules are anti-consumerist bullshit.
never fucking mind jesus christ
[QUOTE=Maladroit;45585355]never fucking mind jesus christ[/QUOTE]
How about you grow up, be a mature adult and not flame someone for not understanding your point.
Then why don't you answer the question "is more freedom with your products bad?"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.