
Microsoft gets another Android maker to pay up: LG - zalthor
http://gigaom.com/2012/01/12/microsoft-gets-another-android-maker-to-pay-up-lg/?utm_source=social&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=gigaom
======
ZeroGravitas
How can they justify the headline if _"Details and financial arrangements of
the agreement were not released"_.

I know they go on to say _"this is likely a royalty deal similar to others
that Microsoft has established"_ but as far as I'm aware it's only rumours and
hearsay about the other deals too.

The previous deal between them that is mentioned involved LG paying an ongoing
royalty for using Linux, but Microsoft in turn making a "net balancing
payment" (whatever that is?) to LG which sounds to me like it's more about
making Linux appear patent encumbered than it is about making money directly.

------
barredo
I'm keeping the score.

    
    
      ☑ HTC
      ☑ Samsung
      ☑ Acer
      ☑ LG
      ☑ Wistron
      ☑ Quanta
      ☑ Velocity Micro
      ☑ Onkyo
      ☑ General Dynamics
      ☑ View Sonic
      ☐ Motorola
      ☐ Barnes & Noble
      ☐ Amazon?

~~~
bookwormAT
You should add Google to the bottom of that list. Google releases one
smartphone every year, and so far they did not sign any patent deal with
Microsoft.

~~~
r00fus
Every Google phone (G1,Nexus,Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus) was made with a hardware
manufacturer (HTC, Samsung, etc). - why add Google to that list?

~~~
bookwormAT
Google might have the hardware manufactured by other companies, but I think
Google ends up as the producer of each Nexus device.

They completely design the software experience, they at least co-design the
hardware, they sell the devices, and they are the one's supporting and
updating them.

------
nextparadigms
I find it very disappointing that not more companies are standing up to
Microsoft. Motorola has already gotten 6 out of 7 of Microsoft's patents
invalidated in Court, and B&N will probably get a similar percentage
invalidated in their case, too.

Even if they still end up paying for some patents in the end, it should be a
much smaller sum, rather than paying almost as much as they do for the full
WP7 license, which represents an entire OS.

~~~
kenjackson
_Even if they still end up paying for some patents in the end, it should be a
much smaller sum_

Why do you say that? Unless MS has come out and said something like RAND terms
on the patents in dispute MS can charge $50B for the use of one patent if they
like.

If anything they may end up paying more because the defendent would have no
recourse, having lost in court. If I were MS (or any company) and I just had a
patent of mine validated by the court, which was integral in my competitors
product I'd start raking people over the coals.

------
joelgrus
I'm not sure why I spend all this time _making stuff_ when it's clear the real
future is in parasitism.

~~~
astrodust
Stop making things and start "inventing" them. Just look into your crystal
ball and get patents for things that are just a bit bleeding edge today, but
will soon be common. I suggest the following:

* Method and apparatus for purchasing goods and services using a virtualized high-definition three dimensional representation or abstraction of a retail store using free-form or pre-defined gesture control and voice recognition.

* Method and apparatus for purchasing manufactured goods made to order from pre-defined parameters configurable by way of hypertext document or through voice recognition.

* Method and apparatus for manufacturing realistic three dimensional replicas of pre-existing objects based on scanned or designed specifications offer through a small self-service kiosk-sized facility.

------
melling
While everyone was debating about whether Google was evil and a monopoly with
70% of search, Microsoft marches on with a desktop monopoly of 90% and a
similar Office document monopoly.

Are you still feeding Microsoft? They are still a big problem, and have been
for almost two decades.

~~~
Zakuzaa
Monopoly in itself is not a problem. The problem is when a monopoly uses its
position for anti-competitive practices.

~~~
DrHankPym
Monopoly is a problem. It comes to a point when they're spending more time and
money on litigating other people's businesses than advancing their own
technology that everyone is forced to use.

------
EwanToo
Previous stories have talked about fees between $5 and $15, depending on what
patents the manufacturer has that can be cross-licensed [1].

From what little I understand, it's essentially the same fee of $15 that
Microsoft charges for each WP7 device, with the idea being not that Microsoft
makes a significant amount of money from Android but that they make each
manufacturer consider Android and WP7 equals in terms of up-front costs (with
the hope that Microsoft can then offer a bit more to get WP7 signed up?).

[http://gigaom.com/2011/07/06/can-android-be-microsofts-
next-...](http://gigaom.com/2011/07/06/can-android-be-microsofts-
next-1-billion-business/)

------
av500
Just that e.g. HTC and Samsung and Acer don't pay anything at all, they just
promised to a) also make Win7 phones and b) tell the world they pay royalties.

Since LG was a Window Mobile shop in the past, I guess they did the same...

------
mmagin
This reminds me a lot of back when the SCO Group was suing everyone who
used/sold Linux and was a big enough target to be worth their time.

------
Craiggybear
When's this scam gonna get busted wide open and Microsoft and its company
officers shut down and thrown in jail?

Because if it were anyone else it would have been done and dusted ages ago.

The whole thing stinks and clearly, they've got help.

~~~
chollida1
> and Microsoft and its company officers shut down and thrown in jail?

Thrown in jail for what? What specific laws are they breaking.

If that were the case you can be sure that these companies would be fighting
back.

~~~
nestlequ1k
It's called racketeering. 50 years ago they were busting your legs. Now the
goons have gotten jobs at disfunctional technology companies, and are
threatening and abusing business via the legal system.

~~~
emehrkay
Could you imagine Bill Gates and Balmer busting up legs of Asian/European
execs?

I get your point, but is is racketeering if it is legal -- 'pay us or we'll
sue' seems to be the norm

~~~
Delmania
It's hardly racketeering. In it's purest form, the patent system actually
protects people from hving their ideas stolen from them, and ensuring they are
properly paid for their ideas. However, your vitriol at Microsoft is rather
amusing. You do realize that Apple, Kodak, and Oracle, among many others, have
launched patent infringement claims against companies that could be considered
competitors?

~~~
emehrkay
Yeah, I said it wasn't racketeering because it was legal

