decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Discriminatory...? | 352 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
But isn't discriminating agains Linux... "Discriminatory?" n/t
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 11:15 AM EDT
n/t

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Discriminatory...?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 12:03 PM EDT
You mean like licenses that specifically exclude open-source?

Fortunately, Microsoft would never stoop to such behaviour, they're only trying
to protect the rest of us from evil Google.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

In a First, Seattle Judge Sets RAND Rate in MS v. Motorola ~pj
Authored by: DannyB on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 04:15 PM EDT
Given the current patent craziness, it would not make sense to ever again
contribute patents to an FRAND pool.

Others use patents to discriminate against you, then you need patents that can
be used to discriminate against them.


---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

In a First, Seattle Judge Sets RAND Rate in MS v. Motorola ~pj
Authored by: DieterWasDriving on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 06:31 PM EDT
"It is never reasonable to condition RAND rates on other business concerns.
That is the definition of discriminatory."

That's absurd.

If you have a good working relationship with a company, they certainly should be
given a better rate. It's certainly less costly and more beneficial to license
to a company that accurately and timely reports fee-bearing sales, pays on time,
requires minimal support, and adds value to the ecosystem. And, especially
relevant in this case, doesn't cost millions litigating to avoid paying the
fees.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )