Two more Android vendors license Microsoft patents

I see blackmail, when it comes to patents, is a very lucrative business. Microsoft doesn't have to do or sell anything, just issue threats, and the money keeps rolling in. Best of all, this sort of blackmail is apparently perfectly legal.

Does anyone else see something very wrong with this picture?

"Does anyone else see something very wrong with this picture?"

It doesn't take agreeing on patents themselves to agree that patent trolling is a horrible, nasty, and just plain evil perversion.

In other words, a perfect example of Microsoft's operational business plan.

If Window 8 is a big ol' fail, I can see a scenario where Microsoft becomes to rely more and more on patent trolling to bring in the beans.

What a bizarre state of affairs for such a large company to come to.

> What a bizarre state of affairs for such a large company to come to.

Fortunately, unlike copyrights, patents can be expected to expire. Once they begin to do so, things will get very interesting for Microsoft.

"Don't feed the troll" takes on a whole new meaning in this context.

Google has Nexus devices that use the same OS and software that MS is suing other for, but I haven't heard about MS suing Google yet. Until MS sues Google, I don't believe or take all these non-disclosed vague agreements seriously.

Actually, Google probably doesn't care who is pay who as long as itself doesn’t have to bear any cost. As a matter of fact, phones built by those who make such agreements will cost more and that alone will work to Google's advantage since its devices will be more competitive price wise.

Nokia will be the shill that attacks Google. They've already started the rhetoric.

- "unspecified royalty",

- "terms have not been disclosed",

- "undisclosed list of patents that it (MS) claims are relevant"

- "previous agreements of this type are believed to have a royalty of $10-$15 per Android device."

- "Microsoft said that around 70% of all smartphones sold in the US were covered by their patent portfolio licences."

- - - - -

Case closed.

.

Google has beat Oracle (so far) and Oracle has paid dearly for it, in terms of public reputation. How many long-time Oracle installations did they lose with their bogus accusations? How many installations did they gain in the same period? My money's on a net loss for that number.

If Google can do that to Oracle, imagine what they can do to Microsoft. Grabbing that tiger by the tail isn't something Microsoft can afford to do while Ballmer is at the helm. Of course, Ballmer's presence does no favors for Microsoft's reputation, anyway...

@JaseP:

Nokia is a wholly-owned subsidiary of M$ now, anyway. I expect the EU to begin treating them accordingly, soon.

Quoting: ...They've already started the rhetoric.

They wouldn't start with rhetoric if they were serious. Besides, Nokia is broke and its market share is dwindling seriously. Unless MS makes serious infusion, they wouldn't be able to sustain a long term legal proceedings.

If MS is getting any reasonable compensation, I don't think they will ever sue Google afraid to disturb such easy revenue and especially when there is a possibility of losing, let alone invalidating some of its patents.

Microsoft, Nokia patents.

Quoting:Microsoft, Nokia patents.

@TA, That is what I meant by "Unless MS makes serious infusion," to re-enact the scenario by SCO.