Patently Dangerous
Synchronising email between different devices seems like a great idea,
but don't think of synching it between the web and a mobile device. Why
not? Because, thanks to software patents, Microsoft owns that idea.
Microsoft is currently suing Motorola over alledged Android infringements, and there's a story circulating that they're alse pressuring Acer and Asustek for royalty payments for using Android. This issue is neatly summed up in this brief blog by Dana Blankenhorn:
Apple are currently suing HTC over the use of Android in its handsets, Oracle are suing Google claiming violations of its Java patents (picked up through it's recent acquisition of Sun) ...
Could we be heading for an all-out patent war?
Microsoft is currently suing Motorola over alledged Android infringements, and there's a story circulating that they're alse pressuring Acer and Asustek for royalty payments for using Android. This issue is neatly summed up in this brief blog by Dana Blankenhorn:
| The problem with software
patents, as opposed to those for drugs or medical devices, is that they
don’t cover the way you do something, but the idea of doing something. Thus, Microsoft claims to control the syncing of e-mail between the Web and a mobile device. You can’t innovate around the patent, as you might around the patent for a new pacemaker. This is what makes software patents so dangerous. They place an ever-larger tax on innovation, because innovations are always based on what came before. And if you can’t innovate around an idea, then you must pay for it. And pay and pay and pay. ... In that scenario Windows doesn’t have to be better. It doesn’t even have to be as good. It just needs to be in the ballpark. |
Apple are currently suing HTC over the use of Android in its handsets, Oracle are suing Google claiming violations of its Java patents (picked up through it's recent acquisition of Sun) ...
Could we be heading for an all-out patent war?
PC World is New Zealand’s top selling computing and technology magazine.
Comments
Anyone with half a brain and access to any info on the US legal system knows:
A) Courts enforce laws made by Congress and the President.
B) To be elected to Congress, (or any other Government position including Dog Catcher) you need money and support, and lots of it. The main source of support comes from large corporations and big business. The media (owned by big business) has a huge influence on who gets elected.
C) The support doesn't come for free! These big election contributors expect and are given access to the Politicians they have supported (they usually support both sides in an election) and a chance to put forward their opinions and agendas, especially in regard to industries where they are big players. When Politicians leave Office they often get jobs as Lobbyists for the Corporations who supported them Politically, where their job is to make sure these Corporations get the same access and influence with the new Government officials.
D)Politics and US Law are hugely influenced by the US Corporations who Politicians need to be elected.
The Lawmakers favor those Corporations and the Laws have nothing to do with what is fair or even good for society.
E) The US has a huge influence on international laws and Patents and even what laws are passed in other Nations.
Posted by: Adam | November 13, 2010 3:42 PM
don't blame microsoft blame the patent system. They're just playing by the rules set out by the patent office and law. If they didnt do this they'd be where google is, creating "free" software that clearly violates dozens of patents and not caring about the consequences. Blame Google for creating Android and not ensuring that it was safe to use!
Posted by: john mitas | November 1, 2010 11:19 AM