Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 11:15 AM EDT |
n/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
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 | # ]
|
|
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 | # ]
|
|
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 | # ]
|
|