Microsoft invites Google to go to the world
Today, Microsoft, represented by Brad Smith and Orazio Gutierez, has published a press release or even more likely an open letter addressing the Internet giant Google. Redmond Corporation invites Google to sit down at the negotiating table and sign a peace agreement that Microsoft believes will resolve the giants' disagreement over the free Android operating system developed by Google in partnership with the Open Handset Alliance consortium.
This topic provides an overview of the ordinary observer of current events with an emphasis on the opposition of Microsoft and Motorola Mobility / Google (the text is large, many links and specific patents). If there are any comments and additions, then write them in the comments or on habraposhta.
Until a short time, Microsoft did not directly encounter Google in the courts over Android. One of the largest software developers preferred to deal with the company's partners, signing up for deductions one by one of both OEMs and ODM collectors. Microsoft has truly declared war on two companies - Motorola Inc. in 2010, as well as Barnes & Noble in 2011. Sony Ericsson was also very confident. That Motorola, that Sony Ericsson (now Sony) still refuse to accept the Windows Phone operating system, making the main bet on Google Android. Barnes & Noble dropped out of the war, having received investments from Microsoft, the situation with Sony is still unknown to anyone (Sony Ericsson CEO Bert Northbert in 2011 said that the company is protected from patent claims, as it owns about 7 thousand patents, not counting Sony and patents Ericsson, and he did not confirm the existence of an agreement with Microsoft, but he didn’t deny it either).
But in May 2012, Microsoft came face to face with Google, which completed the acquisition process of Motorola Mobility (MMI), which made the corporation change tactics of the war against Android somewhat, although it is already quite successful. The fact is that Motorola has so far achieved only one significant success against Microsoft - recognition by the German court of violation of two patents owned by Motorola Mobility and related to the H.264 compression standard ( Adaptive motion compensation using a plurality of motion compensators) (the application in 1992, issued by the company in 2001), Adaptive compression of digital video data (application in 1994, issued in 2000)). Although the violation was recognized, the sanctions were postponed until the decision of the Commission on International Trade of the United States, which deals with the same case, but the decision should be announced only in the autumn. In April of this year, Commission Judge David Shaw decided that Microsoft was violating 4 Motorola Mobility patents, and in May approved the right to demand an import ban and a fine in favor of MMI for each Xbox 360 console sold:
Patents that are subject to litigation in Germany are standard-setting, licensed under FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms, and Google, as the owner of the MMI, has no right to demand a ban on the sale of devices that violate these patents. Yes, and besides, according to Microsoft and a number of independent experts, Google's requirements for deductions are far from the FRAND terms. Thus, in the US, the Xbox 360 console is facing a blockage of sales, a fine and the payment of deductions, whereas in Germany only the payment of deductions and a possible fine. However, the decision in the United States must be verified by six members of the commission who may reject Judge Shaw’s ruling, as well as the presidential signature. So, even with the best deal for Google, the decision can take effect no earlier than January 2013.
')
Microsoft is doing better, both in the US and in Germany. In the US, the company filed a lawsuit for violations of nine patents, of which the judge granted one patent claim ( United States Patent 6,370,566 ) to ActiveSync. Nevertheless, the leadership of Motorola stated that blocking imports into the United States would not take effect due to circumvention of the violation. It is not known exactly how the violation was eliminated (by changing the implementation or removing the broken technologies).
The most serious victory was achieved in Germany, where the court found a violation of the FAT patent . True, this patent has two flaws that can prevent the receipt of stable deductions - its validity period ends in 2014, and there is also a high probability of its recognition as prior art at the request of Linus Torvalds. Nevertheless, until 2014 there is still plenty of time, and decisions on the “FAT vs. Vs case” Torvalds yet.
Microsoft, having received a strategic advantage, seeks not to turn the local hassle into a large-scale confrontation and offers to make peace in many ways on its own terms. In their release / letter, Microsoft executives note the successes achieved from court decisions, focusing on the decision to block imports to Germany, describe the benefits of the agreements concluded with HTC, Samsung and other key Google partners and highlight two key points of a possible agreement: the agreement should be comprehensive, and possible deductions should be based on market realities.
If to specify each position, firstly, licensing should not concern two and a half patents, but should contain the entire pool of patented implementations necessary to create a product free from “patent incursions”. Google’s proposal for licensing a selective subset of patents will not lead to lasting peace, according to Redmond. Secondly, Google should take into account the established size-based deduction policies on the market. Excess license rates in the opinion of Microsoft are destructive and do not lead to solid agreements.
Microsoft's arguments are fairly fair. Requirements 2.25% of the amount of the sold device with a patent infringed does not fit into the practice of FRAND, so Google is clearly going all-in, attracting the attention of regulators.
Judging by such statements, Microsoft is quite appreciative of Google, and in fact offers a rather profitable agreement in their opinion, which is similar to the agreement with Samsung, which is considered the least “indentured” of all concluded with Android manufacturers. That is, it implies extensive cross-licensing of patent portfolios of companies, Microsoft even recognizes that Motorola’s patent fee requirements are legitimate, but the question is only in sum, so Google can pay only penny deductions in favor of Redmond, perhaps even smaller than those that pays Samsung. Such conditions of peace on the part of Microsoft look even profitable if not for some of the political discrepancies between companies.
As for the general situation for Google, the lawyers of the company managed the impossible - to complete the full judicial defeat of Oracle, to achieve a stalemate with the main Apple patents, and also to defeat Apple in a dispute with patents for an industrial design and possible violations in the Motorola XOOM tablet. However, with its requirements of 2.25%, Google attracted the attention of Joaquin Almunia from the European Commission, who is only looking for a reason to fine Google and Microsoft. So far, 2.25% have not caused an explicit reaction from the European Commission, although the commission is considering some claims on violations of Google, and Almunia is still busy with endless penalties towards Microsoft in billions of dollars.
Given that Google has a significant number of patents at its disposal, not counting the MMI portfolio, the continuation of a protracted war can be a difficult test for Microsoft, as well as for agreements already concluded with Google’s key partners. The fact is that Google has long stated that it will in every possible way help its partners from patent claims, but until recently it was an idle talk for PR. Now, Google has moved from words to deeds and began to deploy the artillery and pull it up to the positions of its partners: so far these are HTC positions against Nokia, where Google has filed a motion to recognize Google as the second defendant in the Nokia patent case.
The question itself is quite interesting. On the one hand, Microsoft wins, on the other hand, while Microsoft forged its victory against Motorola, Google was busy with the proceedings from Oracle. Now, the Oracle problem has been solved, the proceedings with Apple have been partially solved, partially solved by Samsung, and Google can focus its attention on Microsoft, as well as on its key partner, Nokia. One more splinter of Google is British Telecom, but the British telecommunications giant has problems with the House of Lords of the United Kingdom. Realizing that Google, having received a breather, can deploy counterclaims using patents that were not previously available to Motorola Mobility, Microsoft decides to conclude at least a win-win agreement without concessions to Google. The search giant will have to make a choice with whom to fight fully armed - with Apple or with Microsoft. If the choice is made “in favor of Apple”, which has most of the patents registered recently, and these patents are of great importance for touch devices, the desired Microsoft contract is likely to receive and in fact can guarantee a considerable inflow of funds for financing Windows Phone. But if Google makes another choice, deciding to fight on two fronts, or even paying attention to Microsoft, then there is a certain likelihood that the contract, even if it is concluded, is not subject to Microsoft, since Google already has experience in recognizing many patents as invalid in process with Oracle.
Above, I said that an agreement with Microsoft could be financially beneficial for Google, if not for the “political” differences. Google positions its system as extremely free, making demands only when certifying Google Play applications. Microsoft, on the other hand, believes that there is no license freedom, so you need to pay extra payments to Redmond. If Google accepts the terms of Microsoft, then this will certainly be a cost-effective deal, but a complete ideological defeat. Android will not only de facto cease to be a license-free OS (and so 70% of the market of Android-smartphones is subject to deductions), but will also lose its declared freedoms de jure. Therefore, it is interesting, what will Google bid on? On the ideology and the spirit of freedom, or on economic gain, gaining access to numerous Microsoft developments? Microsoft made the move, waiting for a response from Google.
This topic provides an overview of the ordinary observer of current events with an emphasis on the opposition of Microsoft and Motorola Mobility / Google (the text is large, many links and specific patents). If there are any comments and additions, then write them in the comments or on habraposhta.
Baseline
Until a short time, Microsoft did not directly encounter Google in the courts over Android. One of the largest software developers preferred to deal with the company's partners, signing up for deductions one by one of both OEMs and ODM collectors. Microsoft has truly declared war on two companies - Motorola Inc. in 2010, as well as Barnes & Noble in 2011. Sony Ericsson was also very confident. That Motorola, that Sony Ericsson (now Sony) still refuse to accept the Windows Phone operating system, making the main bet on Google Android. Barnes & Noble dropped out of the war, having received investments from Microsoft, the situation with Sony is still unknown to anyone (Sony Ericsson CEO Bert Northbert in 2011 said that the company is protected from patent claims, as it owns about 7 thousand patents, not counting Sony and patents Ericsson, and he did not confirm the existence of an agreement with Microsoft, but he didn’t deny it either).
But in May 2012, Microsoft came face to face with Google, which completed the acquisition process of Motorola Mobility (MMI), which made the corporation change tactics of the war against Android somewhat, although it is already quite successful. The fact is that Motorola has so far achieved only one significant success against Microsoft - recognition by the German court of violation of two patents owned by Motorola Mobility and related to the H.264 compression standard ( Adaptive motion compensation using a plurality of motion compensators) (the application in 1992, issued by the company in 2001), Adaptive compression of digital video data (application in 1994, issued in 2000)). Although the violation was recognized, the sanctions were postponed until the decision of the Commission on International Trade of the United States, which deals with the same case, but the decision should be announced only in the autumn. In April of this year, Commission Judge David Shaw decided that Microsoft was violating 4 Motorola Mobility patents, and in May approved the right to demand an import ban and a fine in favor of MMI for each Xbox 360 console sold:
- Macroblock level adaptive frame / field coding for digital video content (USP 6980596)
- Frequency coefficient of digital video content scanning (USP 7162094)
- Method for point-to-point communications within secure communication systems (USP 5357571)
- Capability addressable network and method therefor (USP 6069896)
Patents that are subject to litigation in Germany are standard-setting, licensed under FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms, and Google, as the owner of the MMI, has no right to demand a ban on the sale of devices that violate these patents. Yes, and besides, according to Microsoft and a number of independent experts, Google's requirements for deductions are far from the FRAND terms. Thus, in the US, the Xbox 360 console is facing a blockage of sales, a fine and the payment of deductions, whereas in Germany only the payment of deductions and a possible fine. However, the decision in the United States must be verified by six members of the commission who may reject Judge Shaw’s ruling, as well as the presidential signature. So, even with the best deal for Google, the decision can take effect no earlier than January 2013.
')
Microsoft is doing better, both in the US and in Germany. In the US, the company filed a lawsuit for violations of nine patents, of which the judge granted one patent claim ( United States Patent 6,370,566 ) to ActiveSync. Nevertheless, the leadership of Motorola stated that blocking imports into the United States would not take effect due to circumvention of the violation. It is not known exactly how the violation was eliminated (by changing the implementation or removing the broken technologies).
The most serious victory was achieved in Germany, where the court found a violation of the FAT patent . True, this patent has two flaws that can prevent the receipt of stable deductions - its validity period ends in 2014, and there is also a high probability of its recognition as prior art at the request of Linus Torvalds. Nevertheless, until 2014 there is still plenty of time, and decisions on the “FAT vs. Vs case” Torvalds yet.
Terms of the world
Microsoft, having received a strategic advantage, seeks not to turn the local hassle into a large-scale confrontation and offers to make peace in many ways on its own terms. In their release / letter, Microsoft executives note the successes achieved from court decisions, focusing on the decision to block imports to Germany, describe the benefits of the agreements concluded with HTC, Samsung and other key Google partners and highlight two key points of a possible agreement: the agreement should be comprehensive, and possible deductions should be based on market realities.
If to specify each position, firstly, licensing should not concern two and a half patents, but should contain the entire pool of patented implementations necessary to create a product free from “patent incursions”. Google’s proposal for licensing a selective subset of patents will not lead to lasting peace, according to Redmond. Secondly, Google should take into account the established size-based deduction policies on the market. Excess license rates in the opinion of Microsoft are destructive and do not lead to solid agreements.
Microsoft's arguments are fairly fair. Requirements 2.25% of the amount of the sold device with a patent infringed does not fit into the practice of FRAND, so Google is clearly going all-in, attracting the attention of regulators.
Judging by such statements, Microsoft is quite appreciative of Google, and in fact offers a rather profitable agreement in their opinion, which is similar to the agreement with Samsung, which is considered the least “indentured” of all concluded with Android manufacturers. That is, it implies extensive cross-licensing of patent portfolios of companies, Microsoft even recognizes that Motorola’s patent fee requirements are legitimate, but the question is only in sum, so Google can pay only penny deductions in favor of Redmond, perhaps even smaller than those that pays Samsung. Such conditions of peace on the part of Microsoft look even profitable if not for some of the political discrepancies between companies.
And Google ... what is Google?
As for the general situation for Google, the lawyers of the company managed the impossible - to complete the full judicial defeat of Oracle, to achieve a stalemate with the main Apple patents, and also to defeat Apple in a dispute with patents for an industrial design and possible violations in the Motorola XOOM tablet. However, with its requirements of 2.25%, Google attracted the attention of Joaquin Almunia from the European Commission, who is only looking for a reason to fine Google and Microsoft. So far, 2.25% have not caused an explicit reaction from the European Commission, although the commission is considering some claims on violations of Google, and Almunia is still busy with endless penalties towards Microsoft in billions of dollars.
Given that Google has a significant number of patents at its disposal, not counting the MMI portfolio, the continuation of a protracted war can be a difficult test for Microsoft, as well as for agreements already concluded with Google’s key partners. The fact is that Google has long stated that it will in every possible way help its partners from patent claims, but until recently it was an idle talk for PR. Now, Google has moved from words to deeds and began to deploy the artillery and pull it up to the positions of its partners: so far these are HTC positions against Nokia, where Google has filed a motion to recognize Google as the second defendant in the Nokia patent case.
What's next?
The question itself is quite interesting. On the one hand, Microsoft wins, on the other hand, while Microsoft forged its victory against Motorola, Google was busy with the proceedings from Oracle. Now, the Oracle problem has been solved, the proceedings with Apple have been partially solved, partially solved by Samsung, and Google can focus its attention on Microsoft, as well as on its key partner, Nokia. One more splinter of Google is British Telecom, but the British telecommunications giant has problems with the House of Lords of the United Kingdom. Realizing that Google, having received a breather, can deploy counterclaims using patents that were not previously available to Motorola Mobility, Microsoft decides to conclude at least a win-win agreement without concessions to Google. The search giant will have to make a choice with whom to fight fully armed - with Apple or with Microsoft. If the choice is made “in favor of Apple”, which has most of the patents registered recently, and these patents are of great importance for touch devices, the desired Microsoft contract is likely to receive and in fact can guarantee a considerable inflow of funds for financing Windows Phone. But if Google makes another choice, deciding to fight on two fronts, or even paying attention to Microsoft, then there is a certain likelihood that the contract, even if it is concluded, is not subject to Microsoft, since Google already has experience in recognizing many patents as invalid in process with Oracle.
Above, I said that an agreement with Microsoft could be financially beneficial for Google, if not for the “political” differences. Google positions its system as extremely free, making demands only when certifying Google Play applications. Microsoft, on the other hand, believes that there is no license freedom, so you need to pay extra payments to Redmond. If Google accepts the terms of Microsoft, then this will certainly be a cost-effective deal, but a complete ideological defeat. Android will not only de facto cease to be a license-free OS (and so 70% of the market of Android-smartphones is subject to deductions), but will also lose its declared freedoms de jure. Therefore, it is interesting, what will Google bid on? On the ideology and the spirit of freedom, or on economic gain, gaining access to numerous Microsoft developments? Microsoft made the move, waiting for a response from Google.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/148821/
All Articles