Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Android Cellphones Patents The Courts

Microsoft Asks US Court To Ban Kyocera's Android Phones 148

angry tapir writes: Microsoft has asked a court in Seattle to ban Kyocera's DuraForce, Hydro and Brigadier lines of cellular phones in the U.S., alleging that they infringed seven Microsoft patents. The software giant charged in its complaint that some Kyocera phone features that come from its use of the Android operating system infringe Microsoft's patents.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Asks US Court To Ban Kyocera's Android Phones

Comments Filter:
  • by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:22PM (#49220863) Homepage

    >complaint that some Kyocera phone features that come from its use of the Android operating system infringe Microsoft's patents.

    Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all.

    • by Sylak ( 1611137 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:26PM (#49220905)
      IIRC Google negeoated patent protections/licensing for certain things in android, anything beyond that is the responsibility of the phone manufacturers because it's their software changes
      • by DougPaulson ( 4034537 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:51PM (#49221487)
        @ ZorinLynx: "Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all."

        It would except microsoft knows it doesn't have a legal leg to stand on and the smaller players are easier to extort than the behemoth of Mountain View, California.

        @Sylak: "IIRC Google negeoated patent protections/licensing for certain things in android, anything beyond that is the responsibility of the phone manufacturers because it's their software changes"

        No, google never negotiated patent 'protection' from Microsoft in relation to Android. Microsoft has refused to reveal what these patents are. but is quite happey to fund Patent Trolls [gigaom.com] to go after legitimate companies. See :Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols: Patent trolls under attack, but not dead yet [computerworld.com].
        • by Anonymous Coward

          It would except microsoft knows it doesn't have a legal leg to stand on and the smaller players are easier to extort than the behemoth of Mountain View, California.

          Cool story, Bro. They have to go after the maker of the device. Almost all of the Android device makers pay a royalty to Microsoft. Samsung, for instance, could damn well afford all the lawyers it needs. But they pay. They sure wouldn't do that if Microsoft didn't "have a leg to stand on." Microsoft makes more money from Android than Google doe

          • by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Tuesday March 10, 2015 @12:36AM (#49222291) Homepage Journal

            ah but paying ms and then getting the money back in wp, windows etc licenses - and cross licenses - helps samsung.

            it keeps the smaller players out from the market.

            never noticed how the western phone market is lacking all the new manufacturers? that's not a coincidence and this is how they're keeping them out.

            • I doubt that's the main reason new manufacturers aren't breaking the market in North America.

              I'd be more of the opinion that the difficult and hostile retail market in North America is the main cause, not the other manufacturers.

          • LMOL, umm yes Potsy they would pay Microsoft. Court battles can be lengthy and costly. So it's cheaper to pay than to litigate. Not too mention, Samsung carries Windows line of phones. So if they decided to fight Microsoft in court, they could lose Microsoft's business. Again, better to pay the hush money. Now Google on other hand.....
            • It isn't cheaper to pay than to litigate, it simply costs less NOW, but dare say it costs more in the long run. I like the IBM model better, the smoking remnants of SCO stands as a testimony to anyone daring to take on IBM. It cost a lot of money to burn SCO to the ground, but it serves as a reminder to all, "don't fuck with me"

              • Didn't you just confirm he was right?

                Every case is different since it depends very much on how stubborn both parties are. That is why companies like MS, Google and Apple make large cash deals for unlimited use of the patents they need access to. The other parties know very well the courts will force a reasonable settlement that doesn't ruin the defendant.

                Don't let the headlines confuse you. Many patent cases don't even make it to court, they more often are settles behind closed doors.

        • Not if they get a lawyer like this one [youtube.com]?

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        IIRC Google negeoated patent protections/licensing for certain things in android, anything beyond that is the responsibility of the phone manufacturers because it's their software changes

        It's not just patents that Google licenses - it's also avoidance. Apple went after Samsung because of TouchWiz - not Android. Android was fine (there were plenty of Android phones on the market) as it didn't violate the so-called "rounded corners" patent that involved a grid of icons with a static grid on the bottom (becaus

        • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Tuesday March 10, 2015 @02:51AM (#49222767)

          I have a Moto G, pretty vanilla version of Android 5.0.
          It supports USB Mass Storage just fine and FAT32 formatted usb drives.

          • Really your Motor G shows up as a Removable Drive in Windows? Because every bit of my Google-fu says it doesn't, says it's unsupported, Verizon's website says it's unsupported, Motorola's website says support was removed, and Google's android site provides a big list of technical reasons of why USB Mass Storage is not supported on Android for the internal memory of a device anymore.

          • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

            you're understanding it backwards.

            reading fat32 discs is different from showing up through the usb as an usb mass storage drive. it's a bit of a crapshoot of how the phone shows up to the OS. most show up nowadays as a removabe media device, not as a real drive.

            there's an advantage to that though, as then the drive doesn't need to be unmounted from the phone OS, instead the files are visible to both.

            • reading fat32 discs is different from showing up through the usb as an usb mass storage drive.

              What? It does both. IT shows mass storage devices, reads FAT32 and writes FAT32.

        • Hate to break it to you but Android versions at the time, and Android versions now have always had a static grid on the bottom and looked everybit like Touchwiz did at the time they were sued. Either Android was every bit as guilty or you did a horrible job of explaining what the differences were.

          Also while we're at it there's very technical reasons why USB Mass Storage mode is disabled by default. They involve blocking of the file system, the resulting work arounds to make the feature worked caused positio

        • by Shagg ( 99693 )

          didn't violate the so-called "rounded corners" patent that involved a grid of icons

          FYI, those are two different patents. The infamous "rounded corners" patent has to do with the physical hardware, it has nothing to do with icons/grids, etc.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:29PM (#49220943)

      Patents don't work like that. You don't fight the big players. You kill the small guys. In this case, Kyocera is the small guiy. It's a great system.

      • by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:35PM (#49221399) Homepage Journal

        So much for Microsoft's reassurances that they increase their patent portfolio for defensive purposes.

        It's sad that the patent system is the biggest obstacle to becoming an inventor and entrepreneur. The minute you make anything successful, the sharks gather.
        That surely wasn't the intent of the patent system.

        • by pete6677 ( 681676 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @10:52PM (#49221843)

          There was a time when you had to patent a thing, as opposed to an abstract idea. Imagine if someone had been able to patent "using a mechanical device to cool the air". Refrigeration technology would have been held back for decades.

          • by thesupraman ( 179040 ) on Tuesday March 10, 2015 @12:47AM (#49222333)

            I assume you are intentionally pointing out that refrigeration WAS held back for decades because the ice supply companies (huge at the time) did exactly this?
            Of course with submarine patents, etc these days 'decades' can be much much longer..

        • I think it's doubly sad that any court allows a patent infringement suit to be filed where the party claiming infringement doesn't have to show exactly what patents are infringed upon and specifically how as part of the filing. Any court that permits such a thing has to be seen as irredeemably corrupt forever after and should be replaced with someone honest.
        • by jbolden ( 176878 )

          It wasn't. This expansion was caused by a bunch of Republican judges who liked patent law. It has been a disaster for software. What we need is black letter law from congress on software patents. This isn't particularly partisan so I don't see why congress can't just do this.

      • Show of hands -- how many even knew that Kyocera a) was still in business and b) makes phones?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Google is compliant; Google currently pays Microsoft for each Google branded handset that runs Android. All other manufacturers also pay MS for each Android handset they sell. Kyocera has not signed on yet apparently but they will need to also sign a licensing agreement with MS. Remember to pay your MS tax Android fanboys.
      • Motorola (Google?) is not compliant; they are in fighting Microsoft in court. http://arstechnica.com/tech-po... [arstechnica.com] Arstechnica reports that most cell phone makers pay Microsoft royalties on each phone but Kyocera and Motorola are not paying.
        • Motorola Mobility does not pay but Motorola Solutions does pay. And didn't Google sell Motorola Mobility to Lenovo anyway? The point is that Google used patented code and left all Android vendors exposed.
          • by ArhcAngel ( 247594 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @10:29PM (#49221705)

            The point is that Google used patented code and left all Android vendors exposed.

            Whoa there Tex...It has NEVER been proven/disproven so all that we know for sure is Microsoft alleges Android is infringing some nebulous patents that they refuse to reveal.

            Aint nobody got time for another Apple/Microsoft 15 year court case so most vendors are choosing to pay.

            • Surely they have to tell the court what patents are being infringed in order to get an injunction? Does this case reveal it? I couldn't find any information though.

              • Surely they have to tell the court what patents are being infringed in order to get an injunction? Does this case reveal it? I couldn't find any information though.

                May be, may be not. Even so, they could do so by sealing the filing so only the parties in the case can read it; all it takes is for Microsoft to claim trade secret, harm to its business, etc for that to happen. And the judges in Seattle (or WA for that matter) are typically in their back pocket for one reason or another - it's a very friendly state towards MS, but then, MS pours a lot into funding various public things (f.e education) there too so there's the whole "don't bite the hand that feeds you" thin

          • Motorola Mobility does not pay but Motorola Solutions does pay. And didn't Google sell Motorola Mobility to Lenovo anyway? The point is that Google used patented code and left all Android vendors exposed.

            Microsoft didn't invent those patents. They bought them from Nortel who really was using them defensively and never sued any Android OEMs.

          • Motorola Mobility does not pay but Motorola Solutions does pay. And didn't Google sell Motorola Mobility to Lenovo anyway? The point is that Google used patented code and left all Android vendors exposed.

            There is no such thing as patented code.

      • by Rich0 ( 548339 )

        Really?

        I think most of their patents are around FAT32, and Google doesn't use that on any of their phones (no SD cards or USB storage mode, so compatibility-wise it isn't needed). I'm not sure what else MS is claiming these days.

    • by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:32PM (#49220971) Journal

      >complaint that some Kyocera phone features that come from its use of the Android operating system infringe Microsoft's patents.

      Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all.

      Good point, but (given that IANAL) when you litigate issues like this, you don't go after the company with truckloads of cash that's highly motivated to fight it to the last breath in court. You pick a smaller target that's more likely to settle. Not only getting you the cash, but also establishing a precedent.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Not really.

        Precedents are only established when there is a court decision. When there is an agreement, there is no precedent created.

      • Google purchased Motorola mobility who had a crapload of patents that MS may be violating.

        https://gigaom.com/2014/01/30/... [gigaom.com]

        I'm not sure that MS can go after Google and come out clean. The low hanging fruit- especially since MS bought nokia likely will not have as much defensive posturing to fall back on.

      • by SQLGuru ( 980662 )

        At Mobile World Congress this year, Kyocera was showing off a demo unit running Windows Phone....their first Microsoft device in years. What's the over/under on that unit failing to make it to market........or conversely what's the over/under on Kyocera pushing MORE Windows Phone units in order to save money on the patent settlement?

    • by Microlith ( 54737 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:34PM (#49220985)

      Google could actually fight back, while the handset vendors are far more likely to buckle if their business is threatened with a block. They also resist tipping their hand to reveal what patents they want licensed, but Google would actually demand to see it - and possibly file a patent counter-suit.

      • Google would demand to see what? Google already acknowledges Microsoft's patents and pays a licensing fee. Samsung also pays. They paid $1 billion to MS last year to use Android.
        • The courts have recently been unkind to software patents. Google has lots of money for lawyers and they could spend less on lawyers than they're paying Microsoft if some (any?) of the patents were to be invalidated. Google has agreements with MS that may hinge partially on not going to court with them. However, a win for Kyocera could save them mucho dinero.

          Google may be able to support Kyocera without breaking their agreements and it could be a big win for them without jeopardizing anything except money. T

      • Google pays the patents. It also has a lot more to lose. If an individual handset manufacturer loses in a MS battle, that handset suffers. If Google loses *all* handsets, 'cept MS and Apple, lose. Best to keep it out of court.

      • We've already seen what patents they are, they've been revealed in court and were made public by the Chinese government. The question is whether they are valid.
    • Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all.

      If that were how patents worked then I'm sure Microsoft would have shut down Linux long ago.

      • A fair amount of M$ patents over Linux are invalid, because Microsoft duplicated and distributed Linux internally [microsoft.com].

        That distribution kicked in the patent clause of GPL. Thus estoppling all licensing claims their patents against Linux.. I.E. They authorized duplication, distribution, and use by their Employees/Sub-contractors/etc all of which are 3rd parties to M$ corporate patent port folio.

        A similar claim can be made for Nokia android phones, which Nokia android phones [google.com] of which Micosoft paid 7.2 Billio [businessinsider.com]

        • Uh, no on all points.

          There is no patent clause for internal distribution in the GPL.

          Microsoft didn't put the code in linux, so they can't be legally bound by a license for code regarding it.

          You, are obviously not a lawyer. Any decent lawyer could tell you that.

          • Their is no such thing as internal distribution for a CORPORATION/VIRTUAL PERSON(non-pural).

            Merely using Linux (by copying/distribution in anyform, subject's them to GPL license, like any other type of software. One always needs a valid license to even to just install a program, to do otherwise would make all M$ programs fair game to pirate.

        • That distribution kicked in the patent clause of GPL. Thus estoppling all licensing claims their patents against Linux.. I.E. They authorized duplication, distribution, and use by their Employees/Sub-contractors/etc all of which are 3rd parties to M$ corporate patent port folio.

          I don't think that's correct, what are you considering to be the definition of "distribution" in this context? If my employer installs software on their machines I don't need a license to it, nor do I have any claim to it because my employer is the licensee, not me, they didn't distribute it to me. Just like if I use my friend's TIVO I am not a licensee of the Linux kernel within it and he is not bound to supply me with the sourcecode should I request it because he has not distributed it to me.

          Also you ment

    • by tk77 ( 1774336 )

      Android is open source and from what I understand, is not the part thats licensed on the phones. The companies license the ability to use the proprietary google apps on the devices (and use the android name/trademark?)

      I believe (and IANAL) the issue comes in when the software is then on a device thats being sold. Android itself isn't the issue, because its not being sold by Google. Selling devices with Android on it however, is the issue and why MS goes after the "smaller" companies.

      The real question is,

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • No. It's the vendor that performs the commercialization and hence the infringement. Google doesn't offer patent indemnity to Android vendors like Microsoft does to Windows Phone vendors.

    • >complaint that some Kyocera phone features that come from its use of the Android operating system infringe Microsoft's patents.

      Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all.

      IANAL and I didn't check the details, but if MS are trying to use the International Trade Commission [wikipedia.org] path, then that body can only block the import of products into the US which are determined to be infringing their patents, hence they target the manufactures/importers.

    • by jbolden ( 176878 )

      Google has tried to step into these suits. The problem legally is that Google doesn't sell Android licenses per device so it is unclear if there is a patent violation if they are the ones doing it. This is another area where the legal status of open source is ambiguous.

  • It's nice to be able to collect money from others in exchange for absolutely nothing.

    How can you steal someone's idea if you actually came up with it independently? That should be enough to invalidate their patents on its own. If you and I both come up with the same idea at around the same time, then that idea is "obvious".

    • by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:33PM (#49220981)
      There is a catch 22 in the law here... Patents are public records so anybody can just copy a patent and claim they came up with it... If you hide patents from public view, you'd never be able to know if you violated one prior to the holder filing suit, but you'd have a obvious "it's obvious" argument in that case. IMHO: Patents are issued for way too many obvious things and rarely really have any unique content. I wonder if they really are necessary.
      • by steveg ( 55825 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @10:58PM (#49221881)

        The nature of the way patents are written is that they *are* hidden from public view -- while in plain sight.

        And are they necessary? Economists Michele Boldrin and David Levine [ucla.edu] make a *very* compelling case that they are not. The purpose of patents and copyright is to provide incentive to cause creators to create ("Promote progress" in the words of the Constitution), but the evidence that they show makes a really strong case that intellectual property actually retards progress.

        And Gates made that point himself in an internal Microsoft memo many years ago. "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today."

    • That's what engineering notebooks are supposed to be for.
      To prove you actually invented something, showing how you did it and when.

  • ...It begins. We knew this would happen eventually.

    • by bjwest ( 14070 )

      Welcome to the reading world. You must have just learned to read, or been on an African safari for the past few years if you think this has just started. MS makes a significant portion of their bottom line on Android licensing, and if it weren't for the Chinese government, we still wouldn't know what the hell they claim to control.

      I just hope Kyocera has the balls to fight this shit and win.

      • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

        I just hope Kyocera has the balls to fight this shit and win.

        Well, Samsung, LG, Sony, and HTC all pay the MS tax on their Android devices. Does Kyocera have a larger legal war-chest than those companies?

        • I just hope Kyocera has the balls to fight this shit and win.

          Well, Samsung, LG, Sony, and HTC all pay the MS tax on their Android devices. Does Kyocera have a larger legal war-chest than those companies?

          Almost certainly not. Even if you go up to the parent corp (of which Kyocera Communications is a subsidiary) they still have less than a quarter of the revenue of Sony, for instance, and they don't have the motivation of, say, Google to fight. They'll settle.

      • I just hope Kyocera has the balls to fight this shit and win.

        It probably won't, and even if it did, it wouldn't change anything. We need to get rid of software patents altogether. The fact that Microsoft has a war chest of profitable patents for cell phone software pretty much should disabuse anyone of the notion that software patents are necessary in order to compete and innovate in the market. They're nothing more than leverage for extracting licensing fees from others for solving software problems in the same obvious way that your patent happened to solve a pro

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Seriously. So many features that are "obvious" are patented for no real reason.

  • by faragon ( 789704 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:46PM (#49221083) Homepage
    That's an example of moral misery. In my opinion.
  • by MechaStreisand ( 585905 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @08:56PM (#49221195)
    For everyone who thinks that Microsoft has turned over a new leaf under Nadella, here's the proof that they are still evil at heart.
  • by rHBa ( 976986 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:04PM (#49221255)
    I keep hearing about Microsoft's Android patents but I still don't know what they are?
    • FAT file system for SD cards, among other things.
      • by Anonymous Coward
        The FAT32 patent expired in 2013, however there is exFAT which is still under a patent. Getting into a patent war can be very messy, time consuming and expensive so it is no wonder many firms pay to avoid litigation. I suppose you can say this is the modern day version of extortion. :)

        In case you are wondering how Linux in general is able to avoid the FAT and now exFAT patent on a technicality, according to this article [linux.com].
    • by Nyder ( 754090 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:10PM (#49221285) Journal

      I keep hearing about Microsoft's Android patents but I still don't know what they are?

      The patents are that they will tie you up in court for years at costs way beyond what you'd pay if you just gave in.

      Apparently it's a new idea when you add: on a cellphone to it.

      • Well surely the court system isn't so insane that they can ask for an injunction to ban the phones without revealing what patents are alleged to be infringed. Surely...?

    • In its complaint, Microsoft alleged that some of the features of the Kyocera smartphones infringe patents the software company holds in the areas of power management for enhanced battery life, "self-aware" devices that respond to changes in the user's surroundings, text messaging and doing multiple tasks on a computing device at the same time.

      So they have patented self-aware phones, and other amazing innovations like doing multiple tasks at the same time on a single device.

    • I keep hearing about Microsoft's Android patents but I still don't know what they are?

      There's a link in here [zdnet.com].

  • by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:12PM (#49221295)
    Didn't Microsoft used to say, when it was being sued by competitors for its monopoly tendencies, that companies should compete in the marketplace, and not in the courtroom?
    • by dbIII ( 701233 )
      They said it, but it was no coincidence that Bill Gate's dad was a very good lawyer and Microsoft did very well from day one. There's a long list of clever tricks, from a MITM thing between the DOS developer and IBM to offering Spyglass royalties for every copy of Internet Explorer sold ($0). Using legal loopholes to dominate the market and lobbying to close them before others can use them is a lot of what MS has been about.
  • by Zamphatta ( 1760346 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @09:26PM (#49221357) Homepage
    I really hope Kyocera doesn't back down & settle out of court. I'd love to see this go forward and see if Microsoft's patents really would hold up legally. I doubt they would, but that's all theory 'til it's tested out.
    • Shouldn't google indemnify Kyrocera for any patent issues in Android?
      • Good question. I think might be immune to this, since they signed an agreement with Micro$oft like most other cellphone makers. They'll probably back Kyrocera monitarily if it comes to a court case though, 'cause they'd like to see the patents challenged and not be the ones in the middle of it.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Posting AC as have moderated. They will settle. I really wish Google had shut MS down when they first tried it on anet android. Now I wish Google would fight and win then demand a refund with interest for all fees paid. The patents look like total rubbish, if you think software patents should exist at all.
  • If they weren't any good they would flop in the marketplace and not worth suing over, so I see this as a signal from Microsoft that Kyocera is making some good phones. Anybody here have specific models to recommend (preferably with CM11 on it)? Samsung has gone all nuts with no storage or battery options, so since I'm looking for a new vendor, might as well be one that's fighting a bully.

    • I don't know about their most recent phones, but the Kyocera Rise is a piece of crap. It's buggy and slow, just about the only thing it has going for it is that it is one of the last phones which has a full keyboard. Also the price.
    • Kyocera doesn't have an unlocked bootloader (at least on the Hydro, assume it's pretty much the same across the board) so good luck with CM anything.
  • by Patent Lover ( 779809 ) on Monday March 09, 2015 @10:38PM (#49221775)
    All 7 U.S. Kyocera phone owners cried foul!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 09, 2015 @11:08PM (#49221937)

    Well, it seems that despite Microsofts NDA to try to keep its patents secret, the Chinese government simply published the list of claimed infringing patents Microsoft asserts. Sadly its in Simplified Chinese, but the english in brackets tells yo what they're about (badly spaced).

    It's difficult to take fluff like this seriously (Method and System for Managing Changes to a Contact Database?? Method And System For Configuring A Timer?? Garbage FFS, the patent office joking again).

    Common Name Space for Long and Short Filenames
    Method And System For Configuring A Timer
    Loading Status in a Hypermedia Browser Having a Limited Available Display Area
    RadioInterface Layer in a CellPhone witha SetofAPI's Havinga Hardware-Independent Proxy Layer and a Hardware-Specific Driver Layer
    System Provided Child Window Controls
    Context Sensitive Menu System/Menu Behavior
    Flexible Architecturefor Notifying Applicationsof StateChanges
    Handheld Computing Devicewith External Notification System
    Browser Navigationfor Devices Witha Limited InputS ystem
    Methodand Systemfor Managing Changes toa Contact Database
    Simulating Gestures ofa Pointing Device Usinga Stylusand Providing FeedbackThereto
    Highlevel Active PenMatrix
    SoftInputPanel SystemandMethod
    Synchronizing OveraNumberof Synchronization MechanismsUsing FlexibleRules
    MonitoringEntropic Conditionsofa FlashMemory DeviceasanIndicatorfor Invoking ErasureOperations
    Methodand Systemfor Creating Multi-Lingual Computer Programs by Dynamically LoadingMessages
    Communicating Multi-Part Messages Between Cellular Devices Usinga StandardizedInterface
    Methodand Apparatus ForCapturing And Rendering Annotations For Non-ModifiableElectronicContent
    Selection Handlesin Editing ElectronicDocuments
    Methodand Systemfor File SystemManagement Usinga Flash-Erasable,Programmable, Read-OnlyMemory
    Remote Retrievaland Display Managementof Electronic Documentwith IncorporatedImages
    Computer Systemfo rIdentifying LocalResources
    Event Architecture For System Management in an OperatingSystem
    Exchange ActiveSyncEAS
    Extended FileAllocationTable,exFAT
    Remote Desktop Protocol,RDP

  • What Geniuses.

  • Dude, they own Nokia and all its IP. What more do they need to dominate the future retro-cell revival market?
  • We will never know until there is sufficient resistance. In the meantime, suck it up. This world is your making.

  • I'd like to see a Sailfish OS Brigadier. Perhaps they could also work with the Blackphone people and make a phone that's resistant to both an adverse digital and physical environment.
  • I suggest everyone buy a Kyocera phone as his next phone. Time to fight patent trolls with our wallets.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Those who can't write code, troll those that do.

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...