ie8 fix
madison

Judge rules that targeting Android for destruction is legally OK

By | February 15, 2012, 10:06am PST

Summary: An ITC judge tossed out the key defense Barnes & Noble wanted to use in a patent suit by Microsoft. The full opinion lays out the existential threat Android faces from patent claims.

We learned on January 31 that Barnes & Noble had suffered a major setback in a patent-infringement lawsuit filed against the company by Microsoft.

That day, an administrative law judge (ALJ) at the International Trade Commission (ITC) had tossed out the company’s key defense, that Microsoft was engaging in “patent misuse” as part of a larger scheme to “kill Android.” Today the full opinion has been made public.

I found the decision thanks to a story by GeekWire’s Todd Bishop, who noted that Theodore Essex, administrative law judge for the International Trade Commission, had called Microsoft’s negotiating tactics “certainly hard bargaining,” but not illegal. (You can see the full PDF here.)

Here’s what the ALJ said:

Microsoft argues that Barnes & Noble has failed to offer any conduct that could either by itself or collectively constitute patent misuse. Barnes & Noble responds that Microsoft is committing patent misuse through its actions against the Android operating system. Staff agrees with Microsoft that Barnes & Noble’s theory does not amount to patent misuse.

The decision lays out a chronology: beginning in February 2010, Microsoft “engaged in discussions” with Barnes & Noble over Microsoft’s portfolio of more than 65,000 patents. Microsoft “suggested Barnes & Noble take a license to Microsoft’s patents and mentioned potential royalty rates.”

Barnes & Noble made several counter-offers, but, the ALJ notes, “Microsoft did not consider them fair and did not respond.”

After a second meeting in December 2010, Microsoft sent a cease-and-desist letter with claim charts for five of the six patents mentioned in that letter. In the public version of the January 31 opinion, two full pages (from the middle of page 2 to the middle of page 4) are redacted at this point. Presumably those include details of Microsoft’s “licensing program aimed at manufacturers and sellers of devices that use the Android operating system.”

The ALJ concluded that Microsoft had done nothing wrong:

The ALJ finds that even viewing the undisputed facts in a light most favorable to Barnes & Noble, Barnes & Noble has failed to prove the defense of patent misuse in this case.

The judge dismissed allegations that Microsoft’s collaboration with Nokia and its attempts to acquire patents from Nortel and Novell were objectionable and said no: “The only thing such concerted action might demonstrate is an ill-will towards Android.”

This, for me, was the kicker:

Even assuming that these transactions and the related evidence establishes that Microsoft is bent on eliminating Android as a competitor, the mere fact that Microsoft is targeting Android for destruction is insufficient to establish an antitrust violation, let alone patent misuse.

The ALJ specifically called out quotes from previous antitrust cases. One green-lighted “a desire to crush a competitor” while a second noted that “hostility to competitors (‘these turkeys’) is irrelevant.”

The conclusion?

Microsoft’s tactics are certainly hard bargaining, but they do not rise to patent misuse because there is absolutely nothing about such tactics that expand the scope of any patent.

And if the licensing fee seems too high, well, suck it up and pay. Barnes & Noble accuses Microsoft of trying to drive up the cost of Android (and make Microsoft’s Windows product more attractive) by charging an Android licensing fee roughly equivalent to the cost of licensing Windows Phone.

The judge cites yet another precedent to deny that claim: “[A] patent empowers the owner to extract royalties as high as he can negotiate with the leverage of that monopoly.” Indeed, he adds, Microsoft could simply refuse to license the patents at all. (The situation would be different if any of the patents in question were identified as standard-essential.)

The case now goes to trial, with evidentiary hearings scheduled to be under way already.

Microsoft isn’t the only mortal enemy Google and its Android hardware partners face. Before he died, Steve Jobs said “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product.” And he promised he would “spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong.”

Apple shows no signs of backing down in its Android-related lawsuits. And so the patent wars go on.

Related posts:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

186
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

kizi
sandakine 2nd May
a real fight going on
On to the specific patents, then. Are they relevant? valid? In the end, even if Barnes & Noble loses, by having shined a light on the Microsoft patents in question Google has gained valuable intelligence to craft workarounds in Android. The only question is whether or not Microsoft has showed *ALL* of their cards in this case.
@Rabid Howler Monkey
B&N will sign a license agreement shortly, and the two parties will ask the case to be dismissed. They don't have the cash to drag this out, and it's obvious they're not going to win.
@WebSiteManager I wonder if this could be the start of whatever the business equivalent to a class action lawsuit is? Perhaps alone B&N can't handle it, but if all the companies who Microsoft is strong-arming band together, I'm guessing MS would be the one that couldn't drag it out...both for financial and political reasons.
@ExploreMN

Not likely... you need to remember that MS got into the patent acquisition game as a result of being slugged themselves one too many times.... and given the Apple, who was the first of the mega patent bullies, is still getting away with their own nonsense.... unlikely a class-action style rebuttal would work.

This is just another example of both how destructive the US patent system (at a global level, not just within your own borders I might add) and why the global patent system as a whole needs a complete and total overhaul... it's become all about who can buy up the most patents rather than about developing and thus protecting truly creative innovation!
@WebSiteManager How is it obvious that B&N is not going to win? This ruling has nothing to do with the actual patents. I don't think Microsoft will win much of anything if this goes to trial because the patents are obvious, contain prior art or are an inconsequential part of the Nook's OS. B&N's biggest conundrum is that they may find it cheaper to settle than to fight it. This case just provides yet another illustration of how software patents are bad for business and innovation. Microsoft should feel ashamed to have to stoop to this level.

In addition MS needs to start watching their own back now since Motorola is now going after Windows 7 and Xbox for infringement.
@ExploreMN

They did all band together: and the bandwagon is to suck it up and pay.
@WebSiteManager If that were the case they would have already signed. Microsoft's agreement would prevent them from being able to improve Android and would make the Nook unprofitable; caving in would destroy them.
@Rabid Howler Monkey
what are you talking about gained intelligence? don't you know that google bought motorola mobility who refused to also license the patents and are being sued by Microsoft? therefore, I believe google is well aware of which patents and how they affect the android OS.

the thing about Motorola and Microsoft is that google already license some of the patents so the question is are those patents transferable since motorola mobility will be acting as a separate company even though owed by google.
since google bought motorola is might come out that they're not violating the patents, I'm sure this would send ripples all over the blogosphare. I wonder what the masses of commenters would say.
0 Votes
+ -
@blazing_smiley_face With both EC and US DOJ approval having been granted earlier this week for Google's acquisition of Motorola Mobility, the transaction has yet to be finalized. However, it is close.

In addition, the patents used by Microsoft against Motorola Mobility appear to be different than those used against Barnes & Noble. Here's a rough list:

Microsoft v. Motorola Mobility patents (as of August, 2011)
5,579,517
5,758,352
6,621,746
6,826,762
7,644,376
5,664,133
6,578,054
6,370,566*
* Initial US ITC ruling, December, 2011

Microsoft v. Barnes & Noble patents (as of March, 2011)
5,778,372**
6,339,780
5,889,522
6,891,551**
6,957,233**
** as of February, 2012
@blazing_smiley_face

We're talking about tens of thousands of bogus patents. Tens of thousands. In ten years in medical research, I think I reviewed/transcribed tens of thousands of patient charts. These people could FIND their patents without power databases. No one has a conscious understanding of them.
@Rabid Howler Monkey Patents are public knowledge and Google probably already knows which ones Microsoft is trying to assert because Microsoft has also sued Motorola Mobility over Android, which Google is in the process of acquiring. Litigation risk would definitely have come up during due diligence.
@DanColasanti Then google needs to get that info out to the public. Us developers have no idea about legal junk, we just know that if theres an idea we are not allowed to thoughtcrime, we can come up with better ideas. But we cant if we're not told what were not allowed to do. This really is googles responsiblity here.
@shayne.oneill

Everyone is under nondisclosure. If any of these companies break those contracts, they will pay thru the nose whether the underlying issue is favorable to them or not.
It seems like any open-source product is infringing on some big company's patents. This is the only stumbling block left for open-source software to over come; the world would be a better place if we just did away with software patents altogether. Then, we'd really be free!
@mike_hauss@...

I agree! I think software patents are completely bogus.
@mike_hauss@... Which is why Google is buying Motorola Mobility. They have thousand of patents. The good thing is that Google seems ready to give those away via it's Android OS since they don't charge for it and at the same time would shield phone makers from lawsuits.
@mike_hauss@... I actually kind of blame google for all of this because its refusing to defend its product from microsoft. I mean yes apple and microsoft are the bad guys, but everybody already knew that apple+microsoft are basically sociopathic entities, so complaining about it seems kinda pointless. But google isn't a sociopathic entity, and sells itself on the fact ("dont be evil") and thus can be held accountable on the claim, yet its letting its customers drown in these patent lawsuits for one simple reason that microsoft wont tell anyone what the patents actually are. Since they are about googles products, its high time google used legal discovery to expose what those patents are so the open source developers can create work-arounds to remove the infringements. A patent owner and user if in conflict are *supposed* to give the other the ability to right whats wrong, but since microsoft refuses to tell anyone what their property actually is, its unfair to expect others to pay up when they infringe. We are talking tens of thousands of bizarely worded murky patents here, no-one can tell what patents are being infringed, if any.

And if it turns out microsoft didnt have any patents on it at all, well, microsoft might end up a bit lighter in the wallet, since a profit model of tricking people into handing over profits is probable seriously illegal.
They sell this "do no evil" line and people actually buy it. In the mean time, they happily appropriate others content and IP through search, scanning books (Google Books is as evil as a company cank be from an IP standpoint), code or what not.

They tie it to the words "open" and "free" while linking to their highly profitable ad words and search. They wait for the sheep to defend them in their actions when owners of appropriated IP cry foul.
@mike_hauss@...
That's pretty rediculous... companies spend millions on researching and creating technology and you think someone should be allowed to use if for free... Come on now...really. If I like that TV in your house can I just come and take it... I think not.
@ shayne.oneill

It seems that the Google's "don't be evil" is another way to say "but please, let us steal, don't shoot us yet, that would be evil of you!"

If Google are such a great company, full of research and development talent etc. for they years they are "developing" Android they could have essentially discovered what patents their "OS" is infringing and eventually found ways around it. But they are such great guys, why would they care? It's easier to pretend that Apple and Microsoft are the bad guys.
@mike_hauss@...

Most of the open source is licensed for your own use. Most of these licenses more or less prohibit you from selling other's work. Therefore, no matter what patents etc open source might infringe on, as long as you don't sell that software you are not stepping on anyone's toes.

Thing is, Google is "safe" so far, because they don't sell Android. They don't even license it to anyone. They don't sell any device that contains Android.
The victims are all the vendors who believed the "white lie" of Google that Android is "free". It's surely free to play with, but not free to sell.
0 Votes
+ -
@shayne.oneill
Plus they are sending $billions to a subsidiary in a tax haven as inflated license fees.

Love of money is the root of all evil.
@mike_hauss@...
I'm not fan of software patents, but these ones aren't. They are mobile device patents, not software. Europe doesn't allow software or business process patents.
@mike_hauss@... Fine. YOU code for free. Everyone else who programs would like to be paid for it.
@Rabid Howler Monkey
Ummm....*all* patents are public knowledge. That's part and parcel of the whole patent gig. No intelligence was gained that could not be had simply by reading all the relevant patents.
@jreuter Wrong. The patents at issue here are the ones that Microsoft has been asserting in it's war on Android. Non-disclosure agreements hide the asserted patents from public view when companies choose to pay off Microsoft, which most have done. Barnes & Noble and Motorola Mobility are the only companies, thus far, to stand up and fight Microsoft's patent assertions regarding Android.

What is particularly telling is that neither MM nor B & N have business ties with Microsoft involving Windows and Windows Phone 7.
@Rabid Howler Monkey

Of course, Microsoft has not put out all cards, as neither did Apple.

It is also quite obvious, that "free" things (such as Android) cannot be sold for money.
@Rabid Howler Monkey

or have a pretty good idea since they viewed all the code, and likely have had the companies using Android asking Google if it's plausable.
0 Votes
+ -
GoTo play games
pjckmen 17th Feb
@Rabid Howler Monkey one likes playing games come on Y8
Friv
@Rabid Howler Monkey Ok, boys play nice. Neither Apple or Microsoft together or alone has the ability to kill Android. There are other players in this, end users. Too many custom roms and too many building them. If I'm using Android and you are the company trying to kill it or stop it, I am certainly not going to buy your product IF that happens. I will cook up my own version and even if I have to carry around a 10 year old cell phone or tablet I'm not buying your product. It is the principle of the issue.
@Rabid Howler Monkey
It is not so relevant if the patents are relevant. Micrsoft has plenty more patents in other cases against Android and could easily line up a lot more patents.
B&N should just pay and get it over with.
I think MS and Google are too busy fighting for the distant 2nd place table scraps to realize that they need to double up on Apple and bring them down before Apple takes over the world happy

(and yes I realize this article is about B&N and not Google directly.)
@dtdono0

Sell your soul to Apple or Microsoft?

Been down the MS road, I'll take the Apple road - at least it all works!
1 Vote
+ -
How sad that lies are all you have left in this world
William Farrel Updated - 15th Feb
@itguy10

Been down the MS road, I'll take the Apple road - at least it all works!

Funny, My MS tech works. Heck, it works better then the Apple equivilent in alot of cases.

How sad that you have to sell your soul to a corporation. You have to lead a lonely life, if Apple is your only companion.

Very sad.
  • Flagged
@itguy10

Apple - It just works is the biggest myth in the technology universe.
@itguy10 - Fantastic. I didn't know that!!!

So I can gut our enterprise and replace all our PC's with Apple's laptops and desktops and replace all our servers with Apple's servers running their server OS, right? Could you point me at Apple's server line. I must be stupid because I can't seem to find it on their website.

And I can integrate it all together smoothly, run all our business-essential LOB apps, have our staff work, collaborate-on and exchage docs and data with all our partners without having to deal with doc corruptions and formatting problems, right?

RIGHT?

Right.
@jgibson24

Really? Everyone I know who has switched to Apple agrees. It just works. (That does not mean that there are never problems. Just that they are few and far between and usually easily solvable). I write this on a 4 year old Mac Pro that should keep me going another 3 or more years. My "newest" Mac in the house is a 3.5 year old Macbook that just works. With the latest OS. Without having to upgrade it out the nose. They just work. My dad switched from long time Windows user to a Mac Pro in early 2008. He is glad he did as "it just works."
0 Votes
+ -
jgibson24 "Apple - It just works is the biggest myth in the technology universe.."
I have a Mac and use MS all the time. That is a very accurate statement.
One of those PowerComputing things. Cheap and nasty.
@itguy10
In comparison to Microsoft, "IT all just works" is a valid statement. I work in a large IT organization servicing a large, mixed environment. People using Windows have far, far more difficulties using industry standard facilities than do Apple product users. People who walk into a store and blithely purchase a shiny Windows laptop have absolutely no idea what they are in for down the road. An operating system which has an armload of "editions" is ridiculous.
@itguy10

Operator error's a B*#^. My Microsoft products work just fine.
0 Votes
+ -
Ya, sorry but...
Cayble 15th Feb
@itguy10

Bottom line is my MS stuff works just fine. Always does. Has it been perfect in all ways in all days? Nope, just way too good enough to pass it up.

I say if you can afford Apple and you really really want a Mac then buy one. Nothing wrong with them from what I have seen, BUT...

If your going to tell me your purchasing Mac because Windows doesn't work right, well, we know thats is just not true as a fact. If you had problems so serious you feel you cannot rely on Windows anymore, so be it, very very unlucky you because most of the world runs off of Windows and it couldn't do that for as long as it has unless it truly "just worked".
0 Votes
+ -
So then chadpengar
Mister Spock 15th Feb
@chadpengar
what should I tell all the Windows users I know with their hardware systems that just work? You post would indicate that I should inform them that their systems are actually not working?
0 Votes
+ -
@Quidproquorum
"industry standards" are?

People using Windows have far, far more difficulties using industry standard facilities than do Apple product users

Seeing that Microsoft set the standard in client/server connectivity (AD, et cetera) please let us knwo what standards they are having issues with, as it would be interesting to discover.
0 Votes
+ -
OS10 is crap.
ldselder Updated - 15th Feb
@itguy10 -- If MS only had acouple of configurations to deal with like apple does, the MS OS's would be just as robust as the Apple OS. Lets see the Apple OS work on unlimited configurations like the MS OS does, it would fail 99% of the time....
@itguy10
It is not your soul, it is the thousands of chinese souls being paid slave labor to build your overpriced toys.

Just sayin.
@itguy10
Again, you are really showing a serious lack of knowledge of the IT world. You should really change your name. I work in IT and you absolutely embarrass the lot of us.
@itguy10

Darn right Apple just works! Apple products work as well as a tricycle compared to a Suzuki or Kawasaki 600cc superbike.

But then again, what's the point of education? Even a 5 year old can use Apple products. It's that simple. And also that limited.

Enjoy playing with your shiny kid toy blocks.

http://imgur.com/B3BkP
http://imgur.com/zHAxM

~~~~~~~~~~
Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it.
~ Shaw's Principle

A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
~ Groucho Marx
  • Flagged
@itguy10 If your statement has any truth, it's because with MS products there is more freedom of choice and 3rd party. Anytime you have that there may be some incompatability but the pluses far outweigh the negative. As for Apple, anyone can make a device that spits out "A" and reads "B" but you're restricted to only that, big deal. I can take an apple device and only get on iTunes and call it working to perfection but that is all that Apple will allow me to do and purchase from. Screw apple!
@ Chadpengar
MS works too if ur not a total and utter lazy i*i0T. I have MS XP 10 years older than your 4 year old mac and I have done everything with it under the sun and have yet still to see all the problems people are talking about. Used windows 7 as well and no problems. Here is where the lazy part comes in; All you have to do is set the machine up straight out of the box as you would any machine. Add your favorite most used programs. Make an initial restore disc which takes 10 minutes then go play. And if ur dumb enough not to be able to maneuver the internet without obtaining a virus, pop in the disc, back up my documents folder and let er rip. Bam, brand new again in 5 minutes. Whats the problem? I know a stupid apple person and he still has problems with his machine because hes just a dumb bungling i*i0T.
0 Votes
+ -
kizi
sandakine 2nd May
a real fight going on

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix