Hacker News Reader

Comment by rfrey | Hacker News Reader

Samsung is reportedly looking to lower the payment to nearer $10 per handset in exchange for an alliance which benefit the creation of new Windows Phone devices

Suggests (certainly doesn't prove) that Samsung agrees they're using MS IP, and they're just haggling over price. We have no idea from the article what the patents are for - it could be a hardware patent for all we know. Unlikely, yeah, but unless we know what the patent's for its tough to pass judgement. Tempting and entertaining, but tough.

View on HN

Well, they did have cross licensing agreement with Microsoft back in 2007, but that didn't cover telecommunications.

http://news.cnet.com/Microsoft%2C-Samsung-in-patent-swap-dea...

Maybe the they'll choose to go to court this time, as Samsung is well armed patent wise. MS' objective is clear: to make the cost of Android greater than the cost of a Windows phone license, so the "free" advantage is no longer is valid.

These patents have already been tested in court by other Android handset manufacturers and MS won. Samsung would only be increasing the cost, reducing the likelihood of a favourable partnership deal and postponing the inevitable.

Do you have links/sources?

I only know of Barnes & Noble and Motorola fighting against MS, afaik everyone else immediately settled.

That's not the way that patent cross-licensing works.

So you're saying that if one handset manufacturer had had a legal ruling against them for patent violations relating to Android that wouldn't create a legal precedent?

Absolutely, the article is completely meaningless without that information!

Is that information available though? My understanding is that when Microsoft threatens companies (Amazon, for example) that they don't reveal the specific patents that Linux infringes on. If that information were public then the open source community would make an effort to rectify the situation and Microsoft would lose their hand. It makes sense but it feels so wrong that it makes me cringe.

EDIT: JamieEi has a post with a list of the patents. I think that I'm right about the Linux patents being kept secret though.

Are you seriously suggesting that anyone in their right mind would pay a patent license without knowing the patents that they're supposed to be infringing?

How many millions of dollars do you think major multinationals tend to hand over on faith without seeing some sort of evidence and paperwork?

MS may create FUD by talking about patent infringements in general terms but the minute you ask someone for money you need to make your case.

I think he meant that they don't reveal that information to the public.

The minute they go into court filings they're public and there would be nothing to stop someone like Amazon publishing or leaking them (you can't bring a case against someone on the condition they don't talk about it).

Not at all. Even if the patents are totally invalid or irrelevant, it would take years of multi-million(billion?) dollar patent litigation to prove it. Everyone loses. This way Samsung gets to ship Windows Phones, Android phones, and no one has to deal with a protracted and expensive (probably more expensive than this license) legal battle.

It wouldn't make millions of dollars to actually get the patent details, they'd need to be in the first court filing against you which you could see without even having a lawyer.

If the judge then found out that they'd not revealed the patent details to you before coming to court, he'd almost certainly kick the thing out for being frivolous (you're obliged to try to settle before coming to court and that would include actually telling someone what they'd done wrong).

i was trying to figure out what the patents were for as well. i dug around a bit and found a description from when Microsoft was suing Motorola for using Android:

"...synchronizing email, calendars and contacts, scheduling meetings, and notifying applications of changes in signal strength and battery power."

http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/01/android-lawsuits/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com