ie8 fix

Microsoft convinces another Android vendor to sign a patent-protection deal

By | June 27, 2011, 8:25am PDT

Microsoft has added another Android backer to the list of those signing with Redmond for patent protection.

On June 27, Microsoft announced that General Dynamics Itronix signed a patent agreement with Microsoft for Itronix devices running Android. Microsoft characterized the agreement as  providing “broad coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio for General Dynamics Itronix devices running the Android platform.”

“Although the contents of the agreement have not been disclosed, the parties indicate that Microsoft will receive royalties from General Dynamics Itronix under the agreement,” said Microsoft in its press release.

The General Dynamics Itronix devices are ruggedized mobile tablets, netbooks and ultramobile PCs. Many of the products in the Itronix line are running various versions of Windows, according to their spec sheets. But the GD300, a “Rugged Wearable Computer for Military, Federal/Civil and Commercial Field Service Personnel,” is Android-based.

Microsoft has signed patent-protection agreements with a number of device makers using Linux in their products, including Amazon,TomTom, Melco/Buffalo and more. More recently, Microsoft has been targeting vendors running Google’s Linux-based Android operating system and is working to convince them to pay royalties to Microsoft to cover alleged patent-infringement issues involving Android. HTC signed a patent-protection deal with Microsoft for an undisclosed amount last year that focused on Android.

Not all Android vendors are signing on the IP (intellectual property) dotted line, however. Barnes & Noble is in a legal fight with Microsoft over Microsoft’s claim from earlier this year that the Android-based Nook e-reader violates Microsoft patents.

Some industry watchers believe Microsoft is currently making more from its Android patent deals than it is from licensing the Windows Phone operating system in the smartphone market.

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

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

97
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Microsoft convinces another Android vendor to sign a patent-protection deal
dfwekrdfe77-24353639009530582402581627144131 10th Nov
tcuozc,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
this racketeering must stop!
Linux Geek 27th Jun
M$ cyber-mafia should stop bullying innovative companies that rely on FOSS.
The people should raise and DOJ should investigate these unscrupulous and dirty deeds!
@Linux Geek
If Google had done their due diligence to protect their dev partners with patent protection, then they wouldn't be in this situation to begin with.
Google=shortsighted
@rekliss007
we all know those are phony M$ patents!
Google knows better than law hacks wanna be.
0 Votes
+ -
No.
snoop0x7b 27th Jun
@rekliss007 If Microsoft actually had something to sue on, don't you think they'd have sued by now? 2 years later and no lawsuits... Just FUD.

If Microsoft actually had something they'd sue, but they haven't. It just shows that they can't put their money where their collective oversized mouth is.
@reklissrick They have protected their partners, but not well enough :)
Termopan
0 Votes
+ -
@Linux Geek

...stepped on a patent landmine or ten...

Not saying if MS patent claims hold water, but a lot of big company lawyers seem to be willing to tell their bosses to send MS royalties--and since when does a lawyer ever spend money they don't have to?

The number of companies paying royalties should worry FOSS types. Especially considering how easy it is to run afoul of software patents in the mire they've made of development...
@wolf_z
those are corrupt or dumb lawyers.
Nobody owes M$ one iota!
@wolf_z
Lawyers will tell you all the time to pay them off if it is cheaper than a court fight and the lawyers don't care who is right or wrong. They just tell to sign or settle or whatever because its cheaper. Patent lawsuits are terribly expensive and very few companies want to get in to a patent fight and then find out their patents have been invalidated by the courts. It is better to settle than possibly loose patents in a lawyer's mind.

The problem for Microsoft is the longer they keep it a secret what patents Linux is supposedly infringing on the lower their damages awarded by the court are going to be. The courts will say if you were really damaged why the huge wait when you realized your patents were being infringed on. I also suspect that Microsoft does not want to get into a patent fight with the Open Source community. The Open Source community has done prior art research before and gotten a couple of patents invalided. Microsoft would have to know for a fact that no one out there ever thought of and did what their patent covers. If there is even 1 person who did it, the patent is invalid. Do you really want 40-50,000 people combing the net, libraries, published papers, program examples trying to invalidate your patents? I sure wouldn't. The cost to hirer a patent lawyer to do that level of research would be astronomical. The Open Source community can do it because there are many of them and they are passionate about Open Source. I certainly wouldn't want to get in a patent fight with them given their track record and massive numbers.
@wolf_z many of them to corrupt or dumb lawyer. thesis
0 Votes
+ -
The Evil
Sultansulan 27th Jun
@Linux Geek

MS is the EVIL
0 Votes
+ -
Seriously, EVIL?
A Gray 27th Jun
@Sultansulan So what company isn't evil then? Linux isn't a company, but Red Hat is. Red Hat takes Linux, slaps a bunch of junk code on it and charges money for something that is essentially free. Apple wants to control every step of the process, from purchase to recycling your device, and every line of code (or make money off every app installed anywhere).

So tell me what company isn't evil by your definition. Google? Being ill-prepared for corporate negotiations isn't evil, its just immature.

There are no evil companies, just companies who make a profit and companies that don't. I mean, is it evil that you want a paycheck?
@Sultansulan we all have or had jobs/careers @ 1 time (i'm retired) well off & snug as a bug in a rug. only 62. we all need to make a stand sooner or?. retired from aircraft after 27yrs. all tried to make me cut corners to save money @ the expense of the airplane or the riding fare. to me it was a big NO!. if they can replace you they will. if not, as they say, "It's my way; or the Highway!. save your money, money is power; leading to the origonal article. if you have enough to satisfy yourself you don't have to compromise or be under someone's thumb. enough people don't buy their product, down falls the tower. BY! BY!.
0 Votes
+ -
Evil is as evil does.
pDaleC@... 27th Jun
@Sultansulan Yes! @A Gray doesn't see that Red Hat isn't falsely claiming Linux IP for their own and bullying other vendors with their monopoly-gained war chest.
@A Gray
You might want to do a little more research about Red Hat. Red Hat releases everything they do open source. Take a look at Cent OS. It is repackaged Red Hat Enterprise without support and without the Red Hat name. So exactly what is the problem? I should also mention that Red Hat is one of the top companies contributing code to the Linux kernel as well as other projects. So I definitely would not call Red Hat evil. They do a lot for the Open Source community. Red Hat even helps run a completely free version of Linux, the Fedora distribution. Yes it does help them in the sense they can try cutting edge stuff in Fedora before putting it in their Enterprise supported version, but they give Fedora away for free and pay a few people to work on it with the community.

You get your corporation called evil when you flat out steal from other companies. (See the Stacker lawsuit). You get called evil when you announce a product that you haven't even started on just to keep people from buying a competitor's product. (Vaporware was invented to describe Microsoft tactics & Power Pointware as well) You get called evil when you design your OS to specifically crash your competitor's software so that you can sell more of yours. (DOS ain't done til Lotus don't run & DR-DOS case they lost) You get called evil when your corporation is convicted under anti-trust laws in the US and in the EU. You get called evil when it comes out in a trial you told people in your company do whatever it takes I don't care but cut off their air supply and kill them. (About Netscape at the anti-trust trial) You get called evil when you screw over companies you partner with. (See Stacker & IBM OS/2) You get called evil when you tell computer manufacturers that they must pay you for a copy of your OS for every computer you make/sell even if it doesn't have your OS on it and then switch to charge by the CPU for multiple CPU (SMP) systems. (Windows OEM license deals) I would call it evil when your paid to develop an OS for a company and then rig the contract so you can sell it to every other computer company out there. You also tell them you already have an OS that you can convert for them when you have absolutely nothing. (IBM DOS deal)


Microsoft has never innovated one thing for the software industry. They have done far more damage to it and retarded its growth. We could be so much farther ahead now if Microsoft weren't around. Direct X? Nope they bought the company who developed that. Office? Nope they copied Lotus. DOS? Nope they bought that from a guy. Windows? Nope they bought the rights from PARC & stole from GEM. Microsoft is famous for saying they will have a competing product out in a few months and better than their's so you don't buy from the competitor. In reality is more than year before it comes out, features have been slashed out and the product is buggy and crashes a lot. When you say look at version 3.X of a product how awesome it is, our brand new program will be just as awesome, but sweeps under the rug the fact that 1 and 2 were bad and it took a long time to get to 3. When you lie, cheat and steal your company will get called evil.
@snoop0x7b
You may need to do some research. Both Motorola and B&N are facing lawsuits from Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Perhaps FOSS should stop Patent Theft
The Nasty Old Troll 29th Jun
@Linux Geek
Under the law that's been around for at least a couple hundred years, there are a number of patents that Google violated in Android. Now, if Google had only been that nice law abiding citizen instead of a theif, this wouldn't have happened. Then again, even Google can't innovate when developing FOSS. Guess it's just another symptom of the FOSS movement.
@Linux Geek yes cyber mafia have to stop the creating bullying innovative companies on foss. researchpaper | book report | Admission essay
0 Votes
+ -
I really do hate software patents
Michael Alan Goff 27th Jun
N/T
0 Votes
+ -
I agree
kashyap.bikram@... 27th Jun
@goff256
I agree. At most software patents should be 1 year.
And you shouldn't be able to patent obvious things like.... using the tab button to scroll through links.

I think the main problem has become that anything can be patented, and that limits smaller companies from making anything.
@kashyap.bikram@... At least no more than 5 and if a company goes out of business their patents are still 5 years from time filed not from the time the company was bought.
0 Votes
+ -
Boo! Hiss!
woulddie4apple 27th Jun
Only Apple should be allowed to enforce their patents and their monopoly on rectangular shaped phones and tablets!
@woulddie4apple They don't need a patent on rectangles. They already have a patent on right angles when used in any quantity from 1-24. They got when they bought Euclidian Geometry from the original developer. BTW, they also own Hypotenuse.
So another Android OEM decides to pay the Microsoft tax? Got to love it WP7SOS phones are so dismal that Microsoft has to gain revenue through extortion. I imagine that the MS lawyers threatened to throw as many patent infringement cases at the Android licensee, to assure them monetary losses, regardless of the final outcome of said lawsuits.
0 Votes
+ -
YEAH!!! Rick you are so smart YEAH!
woulddie4apple 27th Jun
@Rick_K
No kidding that wp7 phones are so bad that the company has started suing others for making phones that look and act just like theirs!! You don't see anyone else in the industry doing that right now. So glad that you and I agree on this one!! YEAH!!
@woulddie4apple
Ummm, Apple v. Samsung?

We can all tell you are in love with Apple, but seriously?
0 Votes
+ -
You have to understand
woulddie4apple 27th Jun
@rekliss007
Rick and I ignore inconvenient facts if they don't help us in our jihad against Micro$ux and our eternal love for Apple.
@rekliss007

Let's assume "woulddie4apple" is being sarcastic in his comments, and re-read them. Make sense now?
@rekliss007
In case you have not figured it out by now. woulddie4apple is really a Windows fanboy, pretending to be an Apple Zealot. Kind of like an Apple version of Mike Cox. Unfortunately he/she is not even funny.
0 Votes
+ -
I'm not trying to be funny
woulddie4apple 27th Jun
I'm pointing out how sad you and your ilk are. Nothing funny about that at all. sad
@woulddie4apple You are truly sad, Apple is doing this very thing to Samsung so I guess their products are bad following your line of dedutive reasoning.

I enjoy my WP7, but I think Apple makes a great product as well. The fact is that every company out there with a patent portfolio goes after each other. That is why patent reform needs to happen quickly, but the pharmacutical companies are dead-set against it.
@woulddie4apple

And of course General dynamics is just a little pee on company with little or no resources. come on they're paying royalties because there's something there that they see and don't want to get dragged into court over.
@Rick_K
You have got to also love how Microsoft keeps the whole thing under wraps and won't say publicly exactly which patents it is that they say Linux violates. I suspect it's because they know it isn't true or fear that the Open Source community would find prior art to get them invalided like the community has done before with one of the software debuging patents.
@tim.w.jung@...

This whole thing reminds me of the SCO incident/fiasco.
@Rick_K

attempt to change the subject. plain
@Mister Spock
How is charging a Microsoft tax, changing the subject? It is pretty obvious that WP7SOS phones are not exactly flying off the shelves. If they were, then Microsoft would run a full page ad proclaiming as much.
@Rick_K
LOL grin At least they give the big developers a pricy option to remain competitive in the game, the other big player (Apple) doesn't give any other option besides stopping the developers in their tracks silly
0 Votes
+ -
No doubt, under the cloak of a Non-Disclosure Agreement
Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate 27th Jun
Perfect. Neither party will say what Patent IP-infrined claims were made.

And the Patent FUD continues.
Is anyone seeing a pattern here?... (wink)
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate

That's why they call it Intellectual Property...NDA's are kinda standard...

MS is not the only company doing this. Since SCOTUS rejected MS's appeal for patent reform, no one has any room to gripe. FOSS fans were happy about it until MS does what EVERYONE else is doing. Pick a side guys..
0 Votes
+ -
I'm seeing a patern here
Will Pharaoh 27th Jun
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate
Obviously Linux/Android infringes on patents they claim they didn't.

It's not like anyone involved with FOSS would lie. (wink)
0 Votes
+ -
Quite the opposite--nothing is obvious
Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate 27th Jun
@Will Pharaoh

Which is why there is an NDA. MS does not want specifics for their infringed ip disclosed to the GP.

At least in Oracle vs. Google, litigation necessitates that Oracle cite specific claims and patents that pertain--although their list of claims is now getting whittled down and reviewed by the USPTO.

h-t-t-p://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110621192510777

Are we on the same page now?
0 Votes
+ -
We'll never be on the same page
Will Pharaoh 27th Jun
@Dietrich T. Schmitz
as long as you keep playing your "MS - Bad at everything, FOSS - Good at everything" load of poo-poo game, while everyone else wants to deal in facts

Of course there's a NDA - it covers everything, including how much they're paying for the IP, and what their plans are moving forward, but you claim you're a "businessman", so if that's true, you know darn well why they won't release any info like that on a legitimate claim.

You certainly clam up on your own affairs, but feel MS isn't allowed - why is that?
@Dietrich
If microsoft was going after ONE company then it would possibly be disclosed. Fact of the matter is with Android Microsoft is not going after Google directly - they are going after each of the OEMs. This leads things to be the way they are.

If they shared what the code was someone would try to build around the issues. That ain't gonna happen.
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate Perfect. Neither party will say what Patent IP-infrined claims were made.

Though I too would like to see details of the supposed infringement... Since they refuse to fight them, and have decided to just pay up... I would have to assume there must be some merit. wink
@Badgered
Don't tell that to Mr. Dietrich T. Schmitz, he might blow a few f---ing brain cells with his anger with Microsoft. Its OK for Google to make profit off of free software but let Microsoft make money off their own product or R&D and he will spread lies and make you know that's exactly what he is doing without a care.
0 Votes
+ -
No case.
snoop0x7b 27th Jun
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate

Exactly what I said... If there was an actual case to be made there'd be a lawsuit filed. There's not, so it's just extortion and standard Microsoft FUD.
@snoop0x7b If there was an actual case to be made there'd be a lawsuit filed.

Huh? Why file a law suit when the company is wiling to pay for the licensing? The only time you'd file a suit is when the company refused to license the IP.
@ Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate

Revealing the results of negotiations to third parties weakens a firm's bargaining position in future negotiations on similar issues -- for both sides (Microsoft and General Dynamics in this case). There's nothing suspicious or 'FUD'-ish about it. It's the way any competent management team would operate.
0 Votes
+ -
Weakening their position by disclosure. Bingo. We have a winner.
Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate 28th Jun
@WilErz

Microsoft won't disclose because they have no legal position.

It is MS bullying the small vendor into settling to pay vs litigate--which is exactly what they hope the outcome will be in each case.

The case of Microsoft vs. Motorola and Android is active and it's pretty clear that Microsoft doesn't have the claims that they allege--excellent analysis from PJ who was filling in for her successors with a spot piece:

h-t-t-p://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20110605163439627
0 Votes
+ -
Rubbish
WilErz 28th Jun
@ Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate

'Small vendors' like Amazon and General Dynamics? Do me a favour.

Apparently you never learnt basic game theory. Not disclosing the settlement details is a 'dominant strategy'. That means that whether they've got a strong case, a weak case or no case at all, Microsoft's optimal strategy is to keep the settlement details secret (and the same applies to the other parties in the settlements). It also means that Microsoft's choice of this strategy doesn't reveal any information about the strength or otherwise of Microsoft's case. Claiming that it does only reveals your own failure to think clearly.

What does potentially reveal information about the strength of Microsoft's case is the fact that several large/profitable firms that could easily afford litigation have opted instead to settle, and have agreed to pay royalties to Microsoft. At the same time, two marginal/failing firms have decided to gamble on litigation. For this latter group, the phrase 'nothing to lose' comes to mind.

As for Groklaw, I'm not sure why I should pay particular attention to the babbling of an open source zealot who is neither a lawyer nor has any involvement in the relevant cases -- which I'm not even particularly interested in to start with. I'm quite happy to wait for the eventual court rulings (or settlements). If Google have been stealing Microsoft's IP, I hope Microsoft win. If not, I hope they lose.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft convinces another Android vendor to sign a patent-protection deal
dfwekrdfe77-24353639009530582402581627144131 10th Nov
tcuozc,good post!

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

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