6 ms·

RBarnes & Noble reveals Microsoft's patent strategy against Android

67 points by rabbidroid 15y ago

daniel_solano 15y ago
Link to the submission with the original Groklaw story: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3233029 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3233029
va_coder 15y ago
It's irrational but this makes me lean towards their product instead of the Kindle Fire. Go B&N!
- yread 15y ago
  I don't think it's irrational. Vote with your wallet. And btw I have Nook simple touch and I can recommend it.
- dignan 15y ago
  Not to mention the fact that if you search nook gpl your first result contains a link to their legal page, which has links to tarballs :)
- rbanffy 15y ago
  Not irrational at all. I vote with my wallet - I bought my second Nook a couple months back and intend to buy a third one.
  - outworlder 15y ago
    The Nook Touch is awesome. The only reason I am not buying a couple more is that they are only supposed to be used in the US, unlike the Kindles.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      You must use an IP address in the US for book and software purchases, but, from that point, the items get downloaded to your device regardless of where it is.
- wazoox 15y ago
  I'm quite happy with my Nook Color.
RexRollman 15y ago
I really don't have a problem with people disliking Microsoft over its business practices but I really dislike articles where people write things like "Redmond Devil". I pretty much stop reading at that point.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  At least they didn't refer to it as "M$".
  - mrsebastian 15y ago
    Ah... you have instantly transported me to mid-'90s Slashdot comments.
    - pyre 15y ago
      ... and the Bill Gates borg icon. ;-)
- rbanffy 15y ago
  I agree "Redmond Devil" is a bit over the edge, but, after what they did and continue doing, it's kind of a precise description. edit: I forgot the "burn, karma, burn" line.
brudgers 15y ago
[IANAL] It appears to me that: 1. B&N is arguing that Microsoft's patents are invalid based on prior art rather than that Android does not use the methods covered by the patents. This makes Microsoft's assertion of their interest legitimate even if their patents should be overturned based on prior art (or if software patents themselves ought to be abolished, altogether). This form of competing claims is exactly the sort of matter appropriate for patent litigation. 2. Given their financial situation and the choice of the Nook's operating system being non-central to B&N's overall profitablity, it seems to me that B&N's decision to litigate (somewhat on Google's behalf) seems to be an attempt to swing for the fences and hope for a big settlement rather than focus on business fundamentals. 3. The DOJ appeal seems particularly week given the market share of iOS devices.
- pyre 15y ago
  Placing the licensing fee for these patents at the same cost as licensing WP7 seems: 1) extremely anti-competitive and 2) unreasonable. This seems like Microsoft is still trying to stay relevant via patent litigation rather than actual innovation. If WP7 tanks, then they are still getting the same amount of licensing fees for every Android handset sold, so who cares (from their perspective) that WP7 tanked...
  - brudgers 15y ago
    >"Placing the licensing fee for these patents at the same cost as licensing WP7 seems: 1) extremely anti-competitive and 2) unreasonable." [IANAL] To me, equivalent pricing seems to be plausibly consistent with the fair market price of a mobile operating system which incorporates Microsoft technology... [edit] at least from the perspective of a lawyer representing Microsoft.[/edit] It is hard to argue that Microsoft is placing Android at a disadvantage relative to WP7 when the price is equal since this allows Android to compete upon its technical merits and any perceived market advantage the brand provides.
    - pyre 15y ago
      How is it the the license for a handful of patents is equivalent to the license for an entire operating system that incorporates a lot more than just those patents? It comes out looking something like this: license for WP7 (1000 MS patents) = $40/device license for Android (6 MS patents) = $40/device (obviously the numbers are made-up, but you can get the gist) "a mobile operating system which incorporates Microsoft technology" is a gross simplification.

67 points by rabbidroid 15y ago

Link to the submission with the original Groklaw story: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3233029 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3233029

va_coder 15y ago

It's irrational but this makes me lean towards their product instead of the Kindle Fire. Go B&N!

yread 15y ago
I don't think it's irrational. Vote with your wallet. And btw I have Nook simple touch and I can recommend it.
dignan 15y ago
Not to mention the fact that if you search nook gpl your first result contains a link to their legal page, which has links to tarballs :)
rbanffy 15y ago
Not irrational at all. I vote with my wallet - I bought my second Nook a couple months back and intend to buy a third one.
- outworlder 15y ago
  The Nook Touch is awesome. The only reason I am not buying a couple more is that they are only supposed to be used in the US, unlike the Kindles.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    You must use an IP address in the US for book and software purchases, but, from that point, the items get downloaded to your device regardless of where it is.
wazoox 15y ago
I'm quite happy with my Nook Color.

RexRollman 15y ago

I really don't have a problem with people disliking Microsoft over its business practices but I really dislike articles where people write things like "Redmond Devil". I pretty much stop reading at that point.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
At least they didn't refer to it as "M$".
- mrsebastian 15y ago
  Ah... you have instantly transported me to mid-'90s Slashdot comments.
  - pyre 15y ago
    ... and the Bill Gates borg icon. ;-)
rbanffy 15y ago
I agree "Redmond Devil" is a bit over the edge, but, after what they did and continue doing, it's kind of a precise description. edit: I forgot the "burn, karma, burn" line.

brudgers 15y ago

[IANAL] It appears to me that: 1. B&N is arguing that Microsoft's patents are invalid based on prior art rather than that Android does not use the methods covered by the patents. This makes Microsoft's assertion of their interest legitimate even if their patents should be overturned based on prior art (or if software patents themselves ought to be abolished, altogether). This form of competing claims is exactly the sort of matter appropriate for patent litigation. 2. Given their financial situation and the choice of the Nook's operating system being non-central to B&N's overall profitablity, it seems to me that B&N's decision to litigate (somewhat on Google's behalf) seems to be an attempt to swing for the fences and hope for a big settlement rather than focus on business fundamentals. 3. The DOJ appeal seems particularly week given the market share of iOS devices.

pyre 15y ago
Placing the licensing fee for these patents at the same cost as licensing WP7 seems: 1) extremely anti-competitive and 2) unreasonable. This seems like Microsoft is still trying to stay relevant via patent litigation rather than actual innovation. If WP7 tanks, then they are still getting the same amount of licensing fees for every Android handset sold, so who cares (from their perspective) that WP7 tanked...
- brudgers 15y ago
  >"Placing the licensing fee for these patents at the same cost as licensing WP7 seems: 1) extremely anti-competitive and 2) unreasonable." [IANAL] To me, equivalent pricing seems to be plausibly consistent with the fair market price of a mobile operating system which incorporates Microsoft technology... [edit] at least from the perspective of a lawyer representing Microsoft.[/edit] It is hard to argue that Microsoft is placing Android at a disadvantage relative to WP7 when the price is equal since this allows Android to compete upon its technical merits and any perceived market advantage the brand provides.
  - pyre 15y ago
    How is it the the license for a handful of patents is equivalent to the license for an entire operating system that incorporates a lot more than just those patents? It comes out looking something like this: license for WP7 (1000 MS patents) = $40/device license for Android (6 MS patents) = $40/device (obviously the numbers are made-up, but you can get the gist) "a mobile operating system which incorporates Microsoft technology" is a gross simplification.