Microsoft Continues Android Legal Assault 344
shmlco writes "According to an article on AllThingsD, Microsoft is continuing its legal assault on Android. On Monday the company sued Barnes & Noble, Foxconn International and Inventec over the company's Nook e-reader, alleging patent infringement. To quote Microsoft deputy general counsel Horacio Gutierrez, 'The Android platform infringes a number of Microsoft's patents, and companies manufacturing and shipping Android devices must respect our intellectual property rights. Their refusals to take licenses leave us no choice but to bring legal action.'"
Not Microsoft's Fault (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what happens when you institutionalize bribery in government. If our politicians weren't so easy to bribe, and the voters weren't so stupid this would not be an issue.
Garbage in, garbage out. And Americans vote for corrupt garbage.
Re: (Score:3)
And Americans vote for corrupt garbage.
So, what, we solve this problem by voting for the dudes that say they're honest and working for the people?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Just convince Glen Beck that patents are the spawn of the Devil. Congress will fix this inside of a week.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
WE can't fix the problem. We are a minority group of intelligent people surrounded by morons. The only way that we could fix the problem is if we created a magical device that made everyone more intelligent.
American voters would have to be willing to say, "I will not vote twice for anyone who accepts bribes, even if their platform matches my own." As it is now, people will vote for anyone who claims they agree with them on X issue, regardless of whether they accept bribes or not. Voters just turn a blind ey
Re: (Score:3)
So, the dozens of companies with experience of producing the actual devices would simply sit tight while MS cuts their profits to the ground?
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but no. Public education never had the goal to create critically thinking people. Watch the curriculum closely and realize that the goal is to create a workforce able to fulfill the economy's requirements. Nothing more, nothing less. Think about it: What good would critical thinkers serve from a government's or an economy's point of view?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
So maybe it is better this way, just let the courts sort it all out so that then either Linux developers can pay some RAND license and never have to deal with whatever the patents cover again, find a way around it even it if doesn't work as well like Theora, or just throw out everything that is covered and find new ways of doing it.
I think we will be more likely to redouble our efforts to tear down Microsoft for good. Seems to be working out pretty well so far. [yahoo.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Things like this often settle out of court with neither parter admitting they did anything wrong. Thus the racket and be perpetrated again. I don't think Microsoft really has 240 patents that will stand up in court. To bad all it takes is 1.
Re: (Score:3)
For many reasons, there will be no out-of-court settlement. If Google doesn't take it to the wall, then they expose the rest of the FOSS community to litigation. Death by a thousand cuts/litigations.
I want Microsoft to sue civilians. Users. Then the excrement will hit the airconditioning.
RAND doesn't work for FLOSS (Score:4, Insightful)
RAND doesn't work for FLOSS projects because "reasonable" is in terms of "reasonable fee" and non-discriminatory is "same price to all comers" so while it didn't present a barrier to entry when it was dreamed up, it does to FLOSS where a fee is never charged.
The inability for FLOSS to work with RAND patent licensing is why MPEG is thinking of moving to FRAND - F being Free as in Beer.
Re:Not Microsoft's Fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Not Microsoft's Fault
Nothing is ever Microsoft's fault, according to Microsoft.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, and if women weren't so easy to rape then rape wouldnt' be an issue either.. it's clearly the women's fault.
A 'rape' analogy is never appropriate.
... it's clearly the car's fault"?
What, you couldn't come up with "if cars weren't so easy to steal then grand theft auto wouldn't be an issue either
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not Microsoft's Fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The people getting hurt, in both cases didn't agree.
In fact, it requires the non-consent of one party.
Ahh, so it would have been appropriate if he had used a gang-rape analogy. After all studies show 9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape (IE 9 out of 10 people agreed to it.)
IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it that if they hold the patents for what the android phones are doing, then why didn't they make a decent phone themselves to start with? How is it that google took their intellectual property they dreamed up and made something so much better than their own crap?
Re:IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Ideas are easy, implementation is hard. MS allegedly has some pieces of paper that say "we thought of this first! you can't use my idea!" Google has an actual piece of software that works pretty well. If patents worked at all like they should, MS could only patent their actual implementation of something, not the mere concept itself.
Re:IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why patents are supposed to only cover implementations, not ideas.
Re:IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Informative)
No that's how patents work. In the States there used to be a prototype requirement. If you couldn't make it you couldn't patent it.
Then they removed it.
Then patent trolls appeared.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Ideas are easy, implementation is hard. MS allegedly has some pieces of paper that say "we thought of this first! you can't use my idea!" Google has an actual piece of software that works pretty well. If patents worked at all like they should, MS could only patent their actual implementation of something, not the mere concept itself.
Well, Apple had lot of functionality iPhone software before Google and Apple sued HTC and Motorola over. So you mean Apple has a valid reason to sue and stop Android?
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't copyright what implementation protection is about?
Yes, in that Frankenstein, for example, is Mary Shelly's "implementation" of a story about a the hubris of man and man's inhumanity to man. I don't think Microsoft is accusing Google (by proxy through companies with less resources to defend themselves.... I think Microsoft learned this tactic from Darl) of literally copying code or artistic elements so they have to rely on the U.S. broken system of software patents.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, if you read /. regularly you'll know that Microsoft precisely accuses Google, via proxies, of literally copying code. They are attacking Android heavily because they think this will turn producers away from it, and towards their "safer" alternative. All this is about trying to scare Chinese producers into staying away from Android. It won't work. There is just too much money in Android and too little in WP7.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. And no.
Copyright protects one implementation - if you can create the same output for the same input without copying the actual implementation, then you're perfectly entitled to do it.
Patent protects all implementations [as far as I can see - regardless of whether the patentee actually though of the implementation or not].
Re: (Score:3)
Re:IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Funny)
Because those who can, do. Those who can't, litigate.
Those who can do.
Those who can't teach.
Those who can't do either litigate those who can.
Re: (Score:3)
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, sue.
Re:IF they hold the patents (Score:5, Interesting)
Remember, the more litigious the company, the less innovative.
Apple is not excluded and obviously neither is MS. The only time a company goes "nuclear" with the patent option is when they are betting that in the short term they can make a profit off extortion. Given the open source nature of the products and the sheer size of the companies MS is going after, this is so hilariously shortsighted I don't know where to begin, not to mention how easy it is to get around a patent with GPL'd software.
Re:Big fight about the patent for the laser (Score:4, Informative)
The fight over the laser patent was over the idea not a working model. See for example, http://tc.engr.wisc.edu/uer/uer97/author5/content.html [wisc.edu]
Re:Android owners suck cocks (Score:4, Funny)
you're as witty as microsoft is innovative.
Re: (Score:3)
Now, now, now... that's uncalled for. He's far more witty than MS is innovative. To match MS's innovativeness, he'd have to have posted "this".
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading to the end of the summary. Here, I'll help:
The Android platform infringes a number of Microsoft's patents, and companies manufacturing and shipping Android devices must respect our intellectual property rights.
Re: (Score:3)
The Android platform infringes a number of Microsoft's patents, and companies manufacturing and shipping Android devices must respect our intellectual property rights.
Actually, I think the original Microsoft 'Bob' looked an awful lot like that cute little Android thingy. That's what this all must be about.
Re: (Score:2)
read TFA to see that's about e-readers
In that case they have nothing to fear. I can attest to the fact that the NOOK Color is in fact an Android tablet with e-reader software. Just remove the e-reader (the user can install it themselves).
the quality of their products is not relevant to their patents.
Actually it's the quality of their patents most people have issues with.
SCO anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO didn't die in vain, they were just sacrificed to make this kind of insane posturing and attitude of corporate entitlement seem normal. We got most of our shock at those tactics out of the way over the years McBride & Co attacked Linux, clearing the path for bigger fish, like Microsoft, to publicly act the same without as much backlash.
Good marketing effort. Idiots.
Re:SCO anyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
SCO didn't die in vain, they were just sacrificed to make this kind of insane posturing and attitude of corporate entitlement seem normal. We got most of our shock at those tactics out of the way over the years McBride & Co attacked Linux, clearing the path for bigger fish, like Microsoft, to publicly act the same without as much backlash.
Good marketing effort. Idiots.
I'm not sure it's that way. Microsoft put together the play book and placed it out there for someone to follow. SCO picked it up and ran with it. But not many others did. So the question then becomes whether SCO was the over-the-top publicity event to dull our senses or whether Microsoft is being forced to run their own plays since nobody else is.
Wow REALLY Bad Patents (Score:5, Insightful)
While I am uneasy about patents, a case for truly innovative products can be made. But this is not innovation. This is patenting whatever one can. Like:
Enable display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;
You have got to be effen kidding me. That's a patent? Who was the bonehead that thought something like that is innovation?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Does your statements equally apply to Apple? Just curious. Apple sued HTC and Motorola over Android for patent infringement..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/02/AR2010030203916.html [washingtonpost.com]
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/12/04/apple_adds_12_more_patents_to_lawsuit_against_motorola.html [appleinsider.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Does your statements equally apply to Apple? Just curious. Apple sued HTC and Motorola over Android for patent infringement..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/02/AR2010030203916.html [washingtonpost.com]
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/12/04/apple_adds_12_more_patents_to_lawsuit_against_motorola.html [appleinsider.com]
To me it applies as much to Apple as it does to Microsoft.
Actually I want almost if not all patenting ended. If you can't compeat with a better product then get out of business.
Falcon
Re: (Score:3)
That would mean only the established big players can compete/produce. Because if I invent something with a 10M budget and start producing it, they easily can take my invention and produce it cheaper, and thus I'm out of business, as you wished. What would be the point then for me to invent anything?
As opposed to the situation now, where they just use your invention anyway, and if you sue them then they counterclaim because you're infringing hundreds of their patents?
The little companies tend to get bought out. But it's almost entirely because of the copyrights. The little company has a head start on implementing the invention and employees with know how, which means first to market advantage for whoever buys them out. The patents have almost nothing to do with it -- they just end up on the stack when
Re: (Score:3)
Even shorter answer: 1
Fairly short answer: Software patents are a mistake, as are business patents. Software is written, not "built", and should only be protected by copyright or trademark law, not patent. Patents are for "things".
Re:Wow REALLY Bad Patents (Score:4, Insightful)
It's kind of funny that they think they can patent "natural ways of interacting" too..
Re:Wow REALLY Bad Patents (Score:4, Insightful)
My old 14.4k internet connection and Netscape Navigator 2.0 are prior art.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed.. and AC who already posted clearly came along too late to experience RIPscript on BBSs. One certainly could interact with the alternate-text labelled RIPscript areas before and whilst the images were loading - which actually made graphical BBSing on a 14.4k modem bearable.
Re: (Score:3)
Except for the interaction part.
You could click on links before the entire page was rendered. Is that "interaction" enough?
You could also stop the page download and avoid having the background image load at all.
Re: (Score:3)
Enable display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;
You have got to be effen kidding me. That's a patent? Who was the bonehead that thought something like that is innovation?
That's nothing. The really innovative patents are:
- Crashing web browser when background image finally loads
- Freezing device until USB device wakes up
- Dropping calls when most likely to jeopardise life or career
- Shutting down at most inopportune moment.
Re: (Score:2)
While I am uneasy about patents, a case for truly innovative products can be made. But this is not innovation. This is patenting whatever one can. Like:
Enable display of a webpageâ(TM)s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;
You have got to be effen kidding me. That's a patent? Who was the bonehead that thought something like that is innovation?
It is innovation just not innovation in the 21st century, Microsoft filed a patents for tabbed browsing in 1997 and so the patent have expired yet they are still trying to get people to pay for protection to "Give people easy ways to navigate through information provided by their device apps via a separate control window with tabs"
Re:Wow REALLY Bad Patents (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
While I am uneasy about patents, a case for truly innovative products can be made. But this is not innovation. This is patenting whatever one can. Like:
Enable display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;
You have got to be effen kidding me. That's a patent? Who was the bonehead that thought something like that is innovation?
I thought it was "Buffering Input" which precedes even Microsoft being in business.
Re: (Score:3)
No, that's not a patent. If you knew anything about patents, you'd know that.
Redmond and tone deafness. (Score:2)
You would think well into the Post Gates era the folks at Microsoft would consider a little better how this type of thing looks? Nobody is going to win on this one. All parties involved could have met to negotiate on this and come to some type of agreement long before the legal firepower gets involved. I want to like Microsoft now that they've been taken to the woodshed several times by Google and Apple. Wil Wheaton says "Don't be a dick."
Re: (Score:2)
You would think well into the Post Gates era the folks at Microsoft would consider a little better how this type of thing looks?
Didn't you know we're in the Steve Ballmer era? This is a person who loves to throw chairs, and shouting out how he's going to kill Google.
"This is what happens when a great deal of intelligence is invested in ignorance" - Chairman of Bregna, Trevor Goodchild
But things are unraveling.
We're meant to die.
Falcon
List of these important patented innovations (Score:2, Informative)
Re:List of these important patented innovations (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry for not using preview :-"
Re: (Score:3)
- Permit users to easily select text in a document and adjust that selection; and
Oh, well in that case Android doesn't infringe then.
Re: (Score:2)
1. File patents for obvious ideas involving computers
2. Wait for someone else to implement the ideas and make money
3. Sue them
4. Profit!
(The lack of the ??? step is the truly sad part there.)
figures (Score:2)
Classic legal stance from the losers. If having success in the marketplace alludes you, sue sue sue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Amassing billions and billions of dollars" makes one a loser, I guess.
How long can you continue 'amassing billions and billions of dollars' when your market is shrinking and your competitors own the new markets you want to get into?
Re: (Score:2)
They did not make that money in this market place, they made it in the PC realm.
MS cannot compete in the smartphone market so they fall back to rent seeking.
Re: (Score:2)
MS cannot compete in the smartphone market so they fall back to rent seeking.
In other words, they are making money in a market they have no significant products in? Sounds like a success story to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like market failure to me. Rent seeking is not a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like market failure to me.
Except that patents, a government-granted monopoly, are pretty much the antithesis of a free market.
Re:figures (Score:4, Interesting)
They're attempting to make money in the smartphone market. Remember, they gave Nokia over a $billion. They also have the development costs, so say another $billion. And now there's the advertising blitz, half a billion and counting, that just doesn't seem to be working.
You've got two and a half billion in sunk costs. How many handset licenses do you have to take in at $20 each to pay that off? 125 million.
Keep in mind that MicroNokia - oops, Nokia - has said they won't be releasing Windows smartphones until 2012, and that the other manufacturers are NOT happy about the MicroNokia deal, which they see as Microsoft helping Nokia compete against them in the Windows phone market.
WP7 might eventually earn back it's sunk costs, but it's looking pretty doubtful, especially since Microsoft leaked a WP8-based smartphone.
So that brings us to another question. Why is Ballmer still at Microsoft? The answer is simple - remember how he dumped a bucket-load of stock? Look at the timing. That was a warning to the board of directors - dump me, I dump the rest of your stock, and the price goes through the floor.
The pressure to call him on his bluff is just going to intensify, and someone's going to make a fortune shorting MSFT.
Uh.. (Score:2)
There's a list of some of the patents in the article...
" Give people easy ways to navigate through information provided by their device apps via a separate control window with tabs;"
This is so vague even I can't understand what it is.
" Enable display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;"
Woah. The insight of this is truly staggering.
" Allow apps to superimpose download status on top of the downloading content;"
No idea what this
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't Netscape 1.0 do this? You know, before the background attribute was added? So they have a patent on programmatic regression?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure about that, but I remember years ago learning HTML and it being considered best practice to specify dimensions on all images so that the browser new what space to reserve so that people could start reading whilst the pages loaded. It was relatively obvious back in days when it could take a long time for even a small page to finish loading.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a list of some of the patents in the article...
" Give people easy ways to navigate through information provided by their device apps via a separate control window with tabs;"
This is so vague even I can't understand what it is.
" Enable display of a webpage’s content before the background image is received, allowing users to interact with the page faster;"
Woah. The insight of this is truly staggering.
" Allow apps to superimpose download status on top of the downloading content;"
No idea what this means either.
" Permit users to easily select text in a document and adjust that selection; and"
. . .
" Provide users the ability to annotate text without changing the underlying document."
Could we take "Colour Markers", "Scribbling on a document" to be previous implmentations of this? Because then there's a lot of people you could sue.
With the exception of that download thing, my old Palm Pre did all of that with WebOS. I wonder why Microsoft isn't suing HP since their new tablet and phone also does all of this?
Re:Uh.. (Score:4, Informative)
HP's deep patent warchest would make them a significantly less appealing target than such patent lightweights as Barnes and Noble, Foxconn, or Inventec.. Furthermore, if I understand correctly, Microsoft has cross-licensing agreements with most major computer companies that specifically prevent many lawsuits of this sort.
Re: (Score:2)
This is so vague even I can't understand what it is.
I think it means something like the annoying Win7 rolodex-o'-apps that replaced the formerly clean-and-easy-to-use alt-tab behavior.
"Allow apps to superimpose download status on top of the downloading content;"
No idea what this means either.
Progress bars, nothing more.
Truly revolutionary stuff here, Microsoft. Did you
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno. But given how quickly technology progresses, even if the patent was a great idea in 1996, shouldn't it be irrelevant by now?
Technology progresses too quickly for patents like this to stay there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, because no competent programmer could have come up with those ideas by themselves. 'Oh look, my web page is taking a long time to display because I'm waiting for the background image to download. I can't think of any possible way I could avoid that.'
USPTO problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:USPTO problem (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the result of letting companies get patents that boil down to numbers and abstract generic processes. I think the only way to fix it is to reform how patents are granted, for what, and for how long. If USPTO simply can't handle the load they're under, then they should complain to their bosses for more resources, reform their practices, or change applicant's expectations.
I'm just sick and tired of the intellectual property arms race/cold war that's been going on now for some time.
Visualize this scenario: Alien civilization arrives on earth tomorrow. Wants to engage in trade, they desperately want food and what they have to offer is very advanced technology, much of which at some point infringes on IP held by Earth companies. We explain how the process works and they boggle, "The only way we ever were able to develop space travel was by rolling back IP laws - bar one: All processes or inventions are Fair Use after no more than 5 years (one of theirs is roughly equivalent to one of ours) with financial incentives to those who release their ideas to the public immediately.
You people are still driving cars?!?
Re: (Score:2)
This is the result of letting companies get patents that boil down to numbers and abstract generic processes. I think the only way to fix it is to reform how patents are granted, for what, and for how long. If USPTO simply can't handle the load they're under, then they should complain to their bosses for more resources, reform their practices, or change applicant's expectations.
You ignored a fix, one that would encourage more progress. Get rid of patents altogether.
Falcon
Ridiculous Redmon strikes again! (Score:2, Interesting)
They seem to act just like a patent troll in this situation. In my industry (Pharmaceutical) there's a company that has a patent on validating user input in web applications by verifying it at the server. They've been going around and threatening all EDC (Electronic Data Capture) makers w
Re: (Score:2)
They seem to act just like a patent troll in this situation. In my industry (Pharmaceutical) there's a company that has a patent on validating user input in web applications by verifying it at the server. They've been going around and threatening all EDC (Electronic Data Capture) makers with that.
Any pre-javascript web page login screen is definitely prior art.
In other words, this has been around since the first days of the web.
Can you email me the name of the company?
Microsoft attacts Android (Score:2)
Is this more MS FUD? Are we actually going to find out what MS patents are being infringed? Or is it going to turn out to be another SCO case? A bunch of lies but no proof?
Falcon
Dear Microsoft.... (Score:5, Insightful)
For a very short period it seemed to the more gullible among us, that you're starting to be a decent company. Thankfully, you've show in no uncertain way that you have not changed, and are still that douchebag bully in dire need to be body-slammed on concrete [youtube.com]. I hope that one day it finally happens.
Re:Dear Microsoft.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Me, I'd find that embarrassing.
Enter: Microsoft the IP Company (Score:2)
They can't make a decent media device or phone, so they hold IP and sue those who do make them.
What next? A counter arguement : Why shouldn't we use this idea, it's not like you had any clue how to properly implement it!
Look who is sued (Score:2)
Look who is being sued -- Barnes and Noble and other companies that use android on their device. Correction, relatively small companies without large legal staffs that use android on their device. If android is the problem, then why isn't Microsoft suing Google for infringement? Oh, wait, Google has as much money and as many lawyers as Microsoft does. This is much like locking the drug user up in jail, but ignoring the pusher. If Microsoft really believes that android is infringing, then they should go
Re: (Score:3)
They have to show damages (lost sales) to obtain a large settlement. Android is open source. Google isn't really selling any hardware in the US anymore. Motorola, HTC, they DO sell stuff, and in large quantities. MS already got to them. B&N is doing pretty well with the Nook. They are the juicy targets.
-d
Re:Look who is sued (Score:4, Interesting)
Look who is being sued -- Barnes and Noble and other companies that use android on their device. Correction, relatively small companies without large legal staffs that use android on their device. If android is the problem, then why isn't Microsoft suing Google for infringement? Oh, wait, Google has as much money and as many lawyers as Microsoft does. This is much like locking the drug user up in jail, but ignoring the pusher. If Microsoft really believes that android is infringing, then they should go directly after Google.
Who's to say that Google isn't going to give Microsoft a taste of their own medicine and fund B&N's legal battle?
Promised not to do this? (Score:4, Informative)
Didn't Microsoft promise not to use their patent portfolio in this matter?
Of course, i wasn't one that believed them and i know they are evil, but it would be nice if the media would pound them with being hypocrites.
Moral High Ground (Score:2)
I'm always amused when a corporation get's on it's intellectual property high-horse to try and claim some kind of moral superiority.
That's like a greedy sociopath who uses and abuses people suing someone for besmirching their good name.
"The little people I step on must respect my rights."
Kindle? (Score:2)
With rumors around about Amazon looking for Android developers on the Kindle division, I think this legal attack to B&N is some kind of warning to Amazon: "be prepared if you switch to Android, why do not pay right now?". Another market (ereaders) dominated by Android is not something MS wants
microsoft is saying win7 mobile is not as good (Score:3, Insightful)
SIM only plans (Score:3)
So, MS sues US companies into oblivion... Are htc and samsung etc, in international waters, subject to such extortion?
If not then all these giants of Asian tech need to do is open a web shop with international shipping. I doubt O'Bama is going to hunt down private citizens purchasing goods online.
No GSM carriers with decent SIM only plans? That's another story but illustrates, even in my own country, what a cartel the entire phone industry is. i.e. where it's often cheaper to buy a phone on an expensive contract than prepaid + own phone.
Re: (Score:3)
They could stop the shipping of mail from said webshop to US addresses at the border. That has been done before.
Fuck your intellectual property 'rights'. (Score:3)
fuck your intellectual property 'rights'. i havent given the right to monopolize LOGICAL constructs to you. it was done in my stead, despite me, and is maintained as a 'right', despite me.
noone has the right to ownership of LOGIC processes. i dont recognize any such right, regardless of what party bestowed you with it.
Re: (Score:2)
If we did it would be a happier country.
Not perfect, maybe - but happier.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly :) ABANDON SHIIIIP!
Re: (Score:3)
Alright, where are all the Microsoft astroturfers telling us why this is actually a good thing?
They're still in shell-shock from having their last piece of FUD (that Android has a "bigger problem than Java" because of the linux kernel headers) blow up in their face. That has all the appearance of a support operation for today's announcement, but they've clearly lost the momentum.
They'll be back ... right after the Beast from Redmond receives a new batch of chairs.
Re: (Score:2)
Google has a very small number of patents compared to Apple and Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
Or better yet, maybe a new OS not based on any previous OS. Even Linus said he expects linux to eventually be replaced by something else.
The next OS:
small, fast (written in assembler)
self-modifying code with the correct privileges (why have jump tables when you can just update one address)
That last one is important if you want to start giving your core any of the characteristics of AI without the waste.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the cute part. They didn't sue Google, just the companies that sell products using Android.