- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Microsoft vs. TomTom: Low-Level Hum or Drums of War?
|
|
|
Comments (4)
That's it
I've just made sure that even if I accidentally click on links to Linux Insider, It will never again display that ad, the downside is I will never be able to read the Linux insider articles. And given that I will never be insulted by that ad again, that is a small price to pay.
I wish I knew what it was that is doing that to you Tracy. Don't worry, there are maybe 2 or 3 stories from there a week and you can always go to one of their dozen or so 'sister' sites that will have links to it too. They all cross post to each other like its going out of style anyway..
Probably Tracyanne's refusal to go beyond the ad. When you do, you get a cookie and the full-page LinuxInsider ads stay away for a couple of days. Try it. Delete your cache and cookies and visit the story. You'll get the ad.
OIN's response / some predictions
This is what I sent them as soon as the 'news' hit our newswire:
===============
Message:
I'm not working for TomTom or related to this case in any way, just a simple Linux amateur journalist.
Please read this and let me know what you think:
http://www.techflash.com/microsoft/Microsoft_sues_TomTom_ove...
Thanks in advance,
Hans Kwint, The Netherlands
============
This is what they responded (Ed Meintz)
Hans,
Thank you for your message. We have reached out to TomTom and begun to analyze the patents in question. Rest assured that we take the inclusion of Linux in the suit very seriously.
Regards,
Ed
====================
What this means:
Remember, behind OIN are IBM, Philips, Sony, NEC, Red Hat and Novell. Novell is in a bit of an awkward position here. Nonetheless, the OIN promised to defend Linux, see my report of their talk at FOSDEM '09:
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/115938/index.html#defen...
As you can read on their "Linux Defenders" site their aim is mainly at mobile devices at this moment, and lots of them use FAT. In my opinion, there are two possibilities:
-Linux is not involved in this case. If so, Microsoft just doesn't like everybody pays their protection racket but TomTom doesn't. If that's the case, I think TomTom will settle - given their recent (small) losses. If they do not want to lose at least the FAT case, they might search help from other FAT users. Problem is, most users, such as Nikon, Kodak e.a. have probably already paid their protection racket in the FAT-case, because the last attempt to invalidate this patent did fail for USPTO. Some wild thought: You would almost think Microsoft knows more than we do and TomTom is looking beyond the navigation market. They did software for mobile devices such as Psion / Palm in the past, and this could be a threat to Microsoft software.
-Linux is involved. If Microsoft is aware of this - and probably they are, it might be another Daimler-like test-case against 'insurgent' Linux-users. I suppose the TomTom devices - running a Linux kernel - have the same FAT-drivers as most of us Linux-users are using. If that's the case, OIN will probably be involved and my guesses are we will never here about this case again, because it will be settled behind closed doors. The interesting thing here is that IBM (and Xerox) owns some prior art of Microsofts patent, though USPTO ruled Microsoft also added some new things. If IBM owns enforceable patents on that prior art, it can serve as a defensive weapon against MS' FAT patent. But probably Microsoft already thought of this possibility, and they also probably think IBM doesn't hold patents in this matter.
-A last possibility, though not very likely, is TomTom stops selling its devices in the US. Outside the US there's not much Microsoft can do, especially not in the EU, because software patents have never been validated in a high court in the EU. Going to court in the EU bears the risk of most of _all_ software patents being declared 'invalid', because that's what the patent convention of 1973 decided for 'software as such'. However, if this software is involved in interaction between different devices, it's not 'software as such' anymore, and after all these patents might hold. However, that would be another blown bubble vaporizing billions of 'assumed dollars' that never really existed, because if "Intellectual Property" in the form of patents turn out not to be any property at all, a lot of corporations will 'lose' millions. Not really 'lose', because they never had any existing value in the first place so they cannot lose anything. But I guess this assumed value of 'IP' is already in their books. What's also interesting is that if anybody chooses this way, there will be a big discrepancy between the US and EU market: Software coders in the EU will be able to do innovative coding without lawyers while at the same time any coder in the US has to look around in the patent-minefield before hitting the keyboard. That would mean a serious disadvantage to the US software firms.
I'm not up to date about the situation in Japan or South Korea however, though at this time these countries are not involved I guess.
===============
Message:
I'm not working for TomTom or related to this case in any way, just a simple Linux amateur journalist.
Please read this and let me know what you think:
http://www.techflash.com/microsoft/Microsoft_sues_TomTom_ove...
Thanks in advance,
Hans Kwint, The Netherlands
============
This is what they responded (Ed Meintz)
Hans,
Thank you for your message. We have reached out to TomTom and begun to analyze the patents in question. Rest assured that we take the inclusion of Linux in the suit very seriously.
Regards,
Ed
====================
What this means:
Remember, behind OIN are IBM, Philips, Sony, NEC, Red Hat and Novell. Novell is in a bit of an awkward position here. Nonetheless, the OIN promised to defend Linux, see my report of their talk at FOSDEM '09:
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/115938/index.html#defen...
As you can read on their "Linux Defenders" site their aim is mainly at mobile devices at this moment, and lots of them use FAT. In my opinion, there are two possibilities:
-Linux is not involved in this case. If so, Microsoft just doesn't like everybody pays their protection racket but TomTom doesn't. If that's the case, I think TomTom will settle - given their recent (small) losses. If they do not want to lose at least the FAT case, they might search help from other FAT users. Problem is, most users, such as Nikon, Kodak e.a. have probably already paid their protection racket in the FAT-case, because the last attempt to invalidate this patent did fail for USPTO. Some wild thought: You would almost think Microsoft knows more than we do and TomTom is looking beyond the navigation market. They did software for mobile devices such as Psion / Palm in the past, and this could be a threat to Microsoft software.
-Linux is involved. If Microsoft is aware of this - and probably they are, it might be another Daimler-like test-case against 'insurgent' Linux-users. I suppose the TomTom devices - running a Linux kernel - have the same FAT-drivers as most of us Linux-users are using. If that's the case, OIN will probably be involved and my guesses are we will never here about this case again, because it will be settled behind closed doors. The interesting thing here is that IBM (and Xerox) owns some prior art of Microsofts patent, though USPTO ruled Microsoft also added some new things. If IBM owns enforceable patents on that prior art, it can serve as a defensive weapon against MS' FAT patent. But probably Microsoft already thought of this possibility, and they also probably think IBM doesn't hold patents in this matter.
-A last possibility, though not very likely, is TomTom stops selling its devices in the US. Outside the US there's not much Microsoft can do, especially not in the EU, because software patents have never been validated in a high court in the EU. Going to court in the EU bears the risk of most of _all_ software patents being declared 'invalid', because that's what the patent convention of 1973 decided for 'software as such'. However, if this software is involved in interaction between different devices, it's not 'software as such' anymore, and after all these patents might hold. However, that would be another blown bubble vaporizing billions of 'assumed dollars' that never really existed, because if "Intellectual Property" in the form of patents turn out not to be any property at all, a lot of corporations will 'lose' millions. Not really 'lose', because they never had any existing value in the first place so they cannot lose anything. But I guess this assumed value of 'IP' is already in their books. What's also interesting is that if anybody chooses this way, there will be a big discrepancy between the US and EU market: Software coders in the EU will be able to do innovative coding without lawyers while at the same time any coder in the US has to look around in the patent-minefield before hitting the keyboard. That would mean a serious disadvantage to the US software firms.
I'm not up to date about the situation in Japan or South Korea however, though at this time these countries are not involved I guess.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post