Hacker News Reader

Comment by bodski | Hacker News Reader

Microsoft seems to be getting more and more barefaced about this as time goes on.

Only the other day patent 'analyst' Florian Mueller disclosed funding from Microsoft to write a report on FRAND licensing. He then subsequently admitted that he and Microsoft "...have worked together more than once, but that because of a confidentiality agreement with the company, he can’t elaborate on the details of that relationship..." [1].

Microsoft never really changed their spots, they just switched tactics.

[1] http://paidcontent.org/article/419-is-patent-expertblogger-f...

View on HN

I have to agree with you on this. I have been a Microsoft supporter on most of their enterprises, but the tactics have to change.This is the kind of things that mess up the technology industry.

Why? Companies go right on selling Android and Chrome products when it makes sense for them to do so, but pay Microsoft royalties in order to license their IP. It was reported recently that half of all Android devices now generate a royalty to Microsoft, yet this doesn't seem to have harmed the popularity and overall market success of Android in the slightest.

As tactics go, this seems much less destructive to the technology industry than Apple's attempts to get products they believe use their IP banned outright.

Am I missing something?

If other companies with these two-bit patents managed to extort as large amounts of money from the phone manufacturers, it'd become impossible to make Android phones at competitive prices. There isn't much difference between that and outright banning.

Are you sure they are really all two-bit patents? Microsoft has been making mobile devices since the era of "handheld PCs" back in the mid 90s, and smartphones -- starting with Pocket PC Phone Edition -- since 2002. It would be surprising if they didn't have a strong IP portfolio in the area.

P.S. (not directed at you, jsnell) Is there really anything that warrants downvoting my original post other than an unpopular viewpoint?

> P.S. (not directed at you, jsnell) Is there really anything that warrants downvoting my original post other than an unpopular viewpoint?

That is exactly why I don't look at the karma points. :D

It is destructive either way. And Apple is a whole different story and I won't get into it.

I think mostly my opinion is that Software Patents are destructive to the industry. It limits innovation. The tactics that Microsoft is using to compete in the Smartphone market, are smart, but evil nonetheless.

Now like you said, this won't affect Android's growth. But this is because is a a battle of giants. The problem is that these kind of tactics set the precedent for Microsoft or other company to do it again and even worse, to become the standard.

These kind of tactics used against start-ups for example, is effectively killing them. Patents right now are being used mostly to destroy competition not to embrace it.

The tactics that Microsoft is employing, while legal, are not good for innovation, and are not good for the industry. Of course I am assuming that innovation is the fuel of the industry, but I might be wrong.

And you have heavily slanted analysis from Groklaw but even raising the question of who the person who actually runs/ran that site is "an attack on Freedom(as defined by RMS) and the person who asked it must be condemned and tainted as the enemy on all forums as being on the payroll of M$".

Forget about even raising the question of if there's similar funding involved from any company, even if just for costs of funding. Even hazmat suits won't save you from the erupting flames and moderation for just doubting the one that commenters are on the side of.

Apple is the innovator

Microsoft is the extortionist

Google is the thief

Reply on news.ycombinator.com