patents

Post image for Deathmatch: Ostrich versus Troll

Deathmatch: Ostrich versus Troll

by alec on March 22, 2011

We shouldn’t feel a lot of sympathy for Barnes & Noble, Foxconn and Inventec.  These are the creators of the Barnes and Noble Nook e-book reader, and they’re also the folks that Microsoft sued yesterday, alleging infringement of a series of Microsoft patents in that same device.

The patents are listed below.

I haven’t read any of them in detail, and wouldn’t want to comment on their validity in any case, as I’m not a lawyer.  However:

  1. Note the file / issue dates.  All of these are very very old patents.  The shrill cries from TechCrunch that Microsoft is stifling innovation ignore the facts – that Microsoft invented these concepts over a decade a go.  They were innovators then, and now believe that others are profiting from their innovations.  They simply have a longer view of the innovation cycle than most companies.
  2. Many of these patents are written describing a user experience on a PC.  As mobile devices become general purpose devices – replacing PC’s with so-called “post-PC” devices – we should expect that PC concepts pioneered by Microsoft (and likely Apple) will find their way into our mobile devices.  To the extent that those are patented concepts, someone will have to pay.

Frankly, Microsoft is smart.  Google, the creators of the Android OS used in the Nook, are notoriously weak when it comes to patents.  Microsoft isn’t.  When Google’s open source competitor to Microsoft’s products wins market share by undercutting Microsoft on price, the only logical solution is to level the playing field by asking those who benefit from Google’s largesse to share the profits.   By naming Foxconn and Inventec (the contract manufacturers of the Nook) as well as Barnes & Noble, Microsoft is seeking to impose that licensing fee on the actual manufacturer, and not just the retailer.

After losing key patent battles in the 1990’s (remember Stac Electronics?), Microsoft built a huge patent portfolio.  That portfolio will be a force to be reckoned with for a long time.  Expect Microsoft to use it to win new business, defend existing business, and create new revenue streams.

So who will win this current lawsuit?  In a battle between an ostrich (Barnes & Noble) and a troll (Microsoft), I’d bet on the troll.

{ 0 comments }

It should have been obvious. 

With all of the rumours flying that Skype founders Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis were apparently trying to buy Skype back, eBay has chosen to IPO Skype instead.  After all, with 2008 revenues of $550 million, and projections of $1 billion by 2011, if there was ever a business that deserved an IPO, Skype would be it.

As Andy Abramson points out, however, there are still many unanswered questions, most notably the JoltID license.  Now that the license from Zennström and Friis has apparently been terminated they will have to strike a deal before an IPO.  And how about the patents that are preventing Skype for iPhone from being distributed in Canada?

A massive Skype IPO would be just the thing to electrify financial markets, and bring tech stocks back with a roar.  Could Skype have the same impact on financial markets as Netscape with their massive IPO in the 1990’s?  We can only hope.

{ 0 comments }

No Skype on iPhone for Canadians

March 31, 2009

I was a little irritated at all the Skype for iPhone news that popped up over the weekend.  After all, Skype usually at least gives me the courtesy of a heads-up, and the opportunity to test drive their new software. Not a peep, however.  And then last night, at around midnight, the first twitter reports [...]

Read the full article →

Stockpiling Warheads

April 19, 2007

We've now got the spectre of a good old fashioned patent fight on our hands as Andy "Scoop" Abramson publishes the details of a decade old 3COM patent that may read on the current Verizon / Vonage dispute. And that's why patents, kiddies, are so important to startups.  As Suzie Dingwall Williams recently wrote, the [...]

Read the full article →

Incremental business models vs. disruptive

April 16, 2007

The crows have come home to roost for Vonage.  The company has admitted that it has no workaround to navigate past Verizon's patents, and that such a workaround may not even be feasible.  Interim CEO Jeffrey Citron has declared that one of the first belt-tightening moves will be to axe former CEO Mike Snyder's dot-com [...]

Read the full article →

Vonage, down… but not out.

April 3, 2007

So Vonage has dodged the bullet. In what has to be a very bitter pill to swallow, they've cut a deal with VoIP Inc to provide network services.  VoIP Inc claims to own all of their own IP, providing Vonage with a way to step around the Verizon injunction. It begs the question, however.  How [...]

Read the full article →

Vonage must pay

March 8, 2007

A Virginia jury has just handed Vonage another setback, ruling that it violated several of Verizon's patents.  Vonage must $58 million in damages.  The ruling is somewhat controversial, in as much as some are questioning the validity of the patents.  It's a kick in the teeth for Vonage, already down for the count.

Read the full article →

Limelight Sued by Akamai

July 12, 2006

Patent infringement lawsuits seem to be coming at a fast and furious rate.  Om Malik’s latest scoop is that Limelight Networks (the content distribution network behind such notables as YouTube) is being sued by Akamai.  Akamai, of course, is the grand-daddy of content distribution networks.    I can’t comment on the validity of the suit, obviously, [...]

Read the full article →

Vonage and Patents

July 11, 2006

Jon Arnold teased me yesterday, saying that he had a story he wanted to break on his blog later about patents and Vonage.  Over lunch, Howard and I were speculating what it might be.  I suggested that it was perhaps a license, in order to make the Verizon problem go away.  After all, if you [...]

Read the full article →

Packet 8 Patents

June 15, 2006

PR Newswire is carrying the 8×8 (EGHT) release about their new patent this morning, which Andy Abramson commented on yesterday.  The headline reads “8×8 Awarded Patent for Hosted IP-PBX Technology”, which is causing some confusion and a few howls of outrage.  The key word in that headline is “technology”, as it appears, upon reading the [...]

Read the full article →
Alec on LinkedIn Alec on Twitter Alec on Facebook Calliflower on Youtube RSS Feed Contact me