As Motorola continues its worldwide rampage against Microsoft, the battle in the US is ramping up. The decision has been left to the ITC and President Obama. Now we have the ESA speaking up against Motorola's intended sales ban.
The best part is if this way any other company and Microsoft was the one issuing the ban, no one would care and it would happen. I am glad this is happening, only to show Microsoft that they cant just get away with patent infringement. Microsoft and Apple sue anyone who even looks like a threat. Even banning their own 3rd party support at times ( Microsoft banned any third party to use wireless tech in their 3rd party controllers), they also banned 3rd party distributors from making memory cards for the 360. Apple sued Samsung (who was manufacturing their parts)because their phones looked too similar. Karma's a bitch.
Do you know what this lawsuit is over? This lawsuit is over a standards essential patents that aren't competitively licensed by Motorola even though Motorola pledged they would! "To use 50 of Motorola's patents, Microsoft would have to pay 2.25% against the final price of products that use H.264 -- or $22.50 for a $1,000 laptop. What's more, that rate supposedly scales unfairly. For instance, a $2,000 laptop would cost Microsoft $45, even though the improved specifications (a larger hard drive, more memory, a titanium chassis and so on) bear no relevance to the patents in question. By comparison, to use H.264, Microsoft also has to license 2,300 more patents from 29 other firms. The software giant pays this group two cents to use their technology on a $1,000 laptop (it's noted that Windows qualifies for a volume discount, but nobody pays more than $0.20 per unit). "Motorola is demanding that Microsoft pay more than 1,000 times that for use of just 50 patents," Redmond wrote." http://www.techspot.com/new... In comparison, MS litigation against Android isn't standard essential nor is it even essential and the fact that large corporations like Samsung is settling must and coughing up that much cash, likely means the patent infringement takes place. I think Apple was in the right to sue Samsung, when Samsung ripped everything off down to the packaging. As a gamer, I'm sure you can respect originality. I'm a huge believer in patents (as long as patents are properly granted), as the inventor is due it's fair share for inventions. The key word here is *fair* share!
I do not believe it is fair how they are doing it. I do believe that eventually there will be some negotiation. But as it stands I do not feel bad for Microsoft because right now they are being hypocritical. Stating google is trying to kill video on the web. Ballsy for a company to say considering they make their consumers pay them 60 dollars a year to use their internet they pay for per month, with a service like netflix that they also pay monthly for, in order to watch video through the web. Google/Motorola knows the power of their patients and since Microsoft infringed they are going to make them suffer. About the whole Apple/Samsung thing. It was all bogus and the Galaxy phone barely resembles the iPhone, SO MUCH IN FACT. That Apple tampered with photos of the Galaxy to make it LOOK even more similar to their iPhone. Samsung made the chip that powers the iPhone. Apple was stupid for doing that. Very stupid. It had nothing to do with the look of their phone. Apple was worried, so apple sued. Thats what all of these big companies do. They sue immediately when they feel threatened.
So you are saying this Samsung Phone: http://teenstalktech.com/wp... looks nothing like this iPhone 3GS: http://www.techlivez.com/wp... Really? There is no similarity? Furthermore: "Ballsy for a company to say considering they make their consumers pay them 60 dollars a year to use their internet they pay for per month, with a service like netflix that they also pay monthly for, in order to watch video through the web." It's an option, you don't have to use it, pay for it or even consider it which has nothing to do with a patent war on standards essential technology. With standard essentials, companies don't have much of a choice, but to get screwed and hurt consumers in the process. If you pledge FRAND, you should be held accountable to it. Reminds me when RAMBUS did a similar thing with memory, which didn't work out too well for them. I don't feel bad for MS as they will settle eventually. However, what I do not want is to be sued by Motorola on an essential video codec use on all my websites for instance. Patents should be like trademarks, once it becomes essential there should be checks in place to prevent extortions. I think you are letting your hatred for MS cloud your judgement.
@Nukeitall Yes they are similar, but so are a lot of tablets, phones tv's etc. My point was that Apple sues and bites the hand that feeds just as quickly as Microsoft. About the whole "option" thing. NO it is not an option. You cant use any of their services or ones you pay for without also paying Microsoft. My hatred for MS? Really? So my collection of over 100 games, and having owned 5 360's since launch and paying for Xbox live fuels my hatred I guess. If this wasn't a "fair" case, then this wouldn't have gotten this big. Google/Motorola are doing this for a reason. Maybe to show Microsoft that even the big dogs can be put down. Who knows. I am only saying what I think in my opinion in this matter is. Microsoft owes Google/Motorola and they want their money. It is outrageous what they are asking for but at the same time its allowed so they'll go with it. Until there is a settlement, which will be soon because Microsoft wont want Xbox's to be banned this holiday season. My judgement isn't clouded it's just something we all see everyday. The big guy picking on the little guy, but this time its flipped.
svoulis: "Yes they are similar, but so are a lot of tablets, phones tv's etc." That is straight design rip of a significant differentiating design. Clearly Samsung is capable of making unique designs as evident in later models so I don['t buy that. "My point was that Apple sues and bites the hand that feeds just as quickly as Microsoft." That was a mutual business arrangement, it wasn't a case of one feeding the other at all. More like feeding *each other*. That is irrelevant, Samsung clearly stole the Apple design. "My hatred for MS? Really? So my collection of over 100 games, and having owned 5 360's since launch and paying for Xbox live fuels my hatred I guess." I have bought Apple products, doesn't mean I like them which I don't! I also use a lot and personally choose Google services, but it doesn't mean I like them either. "If this wasn't a "fair" case, then this wouldn't have gotten this big. Google/Motorola are doing this for a reason. Maybe to show Microsoft that even the big dogs can be put down. Who knows." You do know that this has more to do with Motorola than it has to do with Google. In fact, Google is barely involved and won't be until their buyout of Motorola is completed. Motorola is well known in the industry as the most aggressive, albeit MS isn't innocent. "Microsoft owes Google/Motorola and they want their money. It is outrageous what they are asking for but at the same time its allowed so they'll go with it." I think that is for the court to decide, but personally I think if you pledge FRAND then you should stick to it. Given Motorola's history, I doubt they will. "The big guy picking on the little guy, but this time its flipped." This is more a case of a big guy picking on a big guy. These aren't defenseless companies that can't afford overpaid lawyers. Companies don't generally sue someone unless they think they have lots of money to gain. It's all about the benjamins and smaller companie's don't have enough benjamins to make it worthwhile.
How is this going all the way to Obama? I love US law...if your powerful enough, you can ignore it! MS needs a slap after the crap they've done to other companies.
Lobbying in the US is considered bribery in other countries. MS just needs to add $$$ to the right pockets to win.
Because ITC is not part of any nation's court they can't automatically force their decisions in any region. Once they ruled it, they let every country know what was decided, but it's up to each nation to enforce the decision or not. In any classical separation of power system (executive, legislature and judiciary), only Executive power can enforce laws. In the case of USA, for a nationwide decision, it have to be the President (head of government), in other countries it could had been a Prime Minister. And that's why the final decision cames from Obama's office.
MS will drag this in court for about one year a release a new 360 model.
Ban MS! Yeah, no way Obama will do the right thing. And I can't believe that Germany has also found MS guilty and are awaiting the US decision before they ban 360 in their country. Wtf madness is this?! Don't ban 360.....just force them to hand over the $4bn yearly to Motorola. Sorry, but you earned it MS!
Obama is not involved in this. Where did you get that from?
Can't we be done with this crap? Everyone knows this just retaliation for ITC ruling some Motorola Smartphones out of market for using MS patents... Not saying that MS isn't using Motorola patents too. They probably are. But quite frankly, this whole smartphone patent wars have already gone too far. They are all dirty in this story. ITC should either just rule 'em all out of market or tell 'em to suck it and live with it! Whatever they decide just do it at once... This crap is starting to affect other markets as the gaming industry that have nothing to do with it, while companies fight over market share people will start to loose jobs.
True. But Ms filed the first suit. Not like Motorola has been trolling like Apple and MS.
I just want this to go through so MS can wake up and realize all the problems they caused other companies....
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.