Apple And Microsoft Behind Patent Troll Armed With Thousands Of Nortel Patents

from the just-great... dept

You may recall last summer that Apple, Microsoft, EMC, RIM, Ericsson and Sony all teamed up to buy Nortel's patents for $4.5 billion. They beat out a team of Google and Intel who bid a bit less. While there was some antitrust scrutiny over the deal, it was dropped and the purchase went through. Apparently, the new owners picked off a bunch of patents to transfer to themselves... and then all (minus EMC, who, one hopes, was horrified by the plans) decided to support a massive new patent troll armed with the remaining 4,000 patents. The company is called Rockstar Consortium, and it's run by the folks who used to run Nortel's patent licensing program anyway -- but now employs people whose job it is to just find other companies to threaten:
But Widdowson is a specialist. He's one of 10 reverse-engineers working full time for a stealthy company funded by some of the biggest names in technology: Apple, Microsoft, Research In Motion, Sony, and Ericsson. Called the Rockstar Consortium, the 32-person outfit has a single-minded mission: It examines successful products, like routers and smartphones, and it tries to find proof that these products infringe on a portfolio of over 4,000 technology patents once owned by one of the world's largest telecommunications companies.

When a Rockstar engineer uncovers evidence of infringement, the company documents it, contacts the manufacturer, and demands licensing fees for the patents in question. The demand is backed by the implicit threat of a patent lawsuit in federal court. Eight of the company's staff are lawyers. In the last two months, Rockstar has started negotiations with as many as 100 potential licensees. And with control of a patent portfolio covering core wireless communications technologies such as LTE (Long Term Evolution) and 3G, there is literally no end in sight.
The article admits that Nortel got most of these patents because it wanted them for "defensive" reasons. And now look at how they're being used. Remember that the next time you hear a company promise to only use its patents defensively. There's also a ridiculous quote from Rockstar's CEO, John Veschi:
“A lot of people are still surprised to see the quality and the diversity of the IP that was in Nortel,” he says. “And the fundamental question comes back: ‘How the hell did you guys go bankrupt? Why weren’t you Google? Why weren’t you Facebook? Why weren’t you all these things, because you guys actually had the ideas for these business models before they did?’"
The real answer, of course, is because patents are meaningless. Ideas are worth nothing by themselves. Ideas only matter if you execute, and anyone who's ever actually executed on an idea will tell you that the original idea almost is never reflected in the final product. The process of going from idea to actual product is a process by which you learn that what matters is not what you thought mattered. And yet, for reasons that make no sense to anyone who has ever actually built a product, creating monopolies around the ideas only serves to create a massive tollbooth towards actual innovation. And that's what we have here -- and it's funded by Apple and Microsoft.

Once again, we see that these two large companies are using the patent system not to innovate, but to stop up and coming competitors from innovating. The patent system isn't being used to encourage innovation but to protect incumbents from an open market.

Oh, and worst of all, the reason that the antitrust effort was dropped was because Apple and Microsoft promised to license the key patents under "reasonable terms." But... Rockstar is not subject to that agreement.
But the new company — Rockstar Consortium — isn’t bound by the promises that its member companies made, according to Veschi. “We are separate,” he says. “That does not apply to us.”
That seems quite problematic, and perhaps worthwhile for the government to reopen its investigation...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    DannyB (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:13am

    What? They left out Oracle?

    Oracle wants to be in the patent trolling business. That appears to be the primary reason they bought the Sun before it went dark.

    All that is necessary for Apple/Microsoft/Oracle to triumph is for Google men to do nothing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Lowestofthekeys (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:17am

    I have a feeling we're not far off from Metal Gear Solid 4 corporate warfare.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:30am

      Re:

      More like Shadowrun.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:38am

        Re: Re:

        Wait, we'll get magic? Awesome.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          rangda (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:12am

          Re: Re: Re:

          In slightly less than 7 months!

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:36am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            In slightly less than 7 months!

            Well, some of us here have already started to turn into Trolls.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:52am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            That's when Hogwart's patents expire?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:33am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              That's when Hogwart's patents expire?

              Wikipedia Entry on Shadowrun

              I am going from years' old memory on this but I played Shadowrun back in the late 80s and early 90s, and the story goes that on the end of the Mayan Long Count, December 20th, 2012, latent and forgotten capabilities of Magic in the human genome all-the-sudden turn back on in a large group of humans. Thus, in 7 months, if the world portrayed in the game is the same as this world, we all get some form of magic back. And dragons return. And people turn into Orcs, Trolls, Goblins, and we start having Elves and Dwarves as children, and everything. It was a modern urban fantasy. Fun game too.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                teka, May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:42am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                iirc the Year of Chaos was 2011. we should be on the back side of VITAS with UGE going strong. Still reeling from Dunkelzahn's explanation and all that.

                at least the New York quake has been delayed, still time to escape NY and LA.

                /nerd

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 12:03pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  iirc the Year of Chaos was 2011

                  Your definitely bringing me back. I seem to remember there being a huge quake that broke up a bunch of states, and there was a Northern California (which became the California Free State) and Southern California (which parts became Azteca,) with Northern California having a President, and Southern California being a wasteland with no center of power. At the time I was playing, I lived in Northern California, so most of the games took place there in the California Free State.

                  I don't remember Snake Plissken as part of the game though.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        vegetaman (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 6:03pm

        Re: Re:

        Hopefully with 3rd edition rules, though.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DogBreath, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:47am

      Re:

      I was thinking more along the lines of CyberStorm 2: Corporate Wars, but alas, there is no "Activate Patent Troll Lawyer and sue the vinegar out of the competition" feature in the game. No backstabbing, only hard work and head-on attacks.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    weneedhelp (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:26am

    The company is called Rockstar Consortium

    Is that a joke?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Baldaur Regis (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:12am

      Re: The company is called Rockstar Consortium

      And when will Rockstar - the energy drink company - sue them for trademark infringement?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        orbitalinsertion (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:30am

        Re: Re: The company is called Rockstar Consortium

        I was thinking maybe one of the Rockstar game developer companies could go for a frivolous trademark suit here. Perhaps organizations with "Rockstar" in their name could form a consortium...

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:35am

          Re: Re: Re: The company is called Rockstar Consortium

          Or musicians in the rock genre could go for a class action defamation?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 5:38pm

        Re: Re: The company is called Rockstar Consortium

        Sue, Sue, call my lawyer; her name is Sue!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    John Doe, May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:28am

    I have sworn off Apple, MS will be much harder

    I have sworn off Apple for two reasons, their walled garden and their trollish behavior. I am going to do my best to avoid MS but that will be much harder to do. Its time the market decides who wins and we can do that buy not supporting patent trolls.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Zakida Paul (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:39am

      Re: I have sworn off Apple, MS will be much harder

      The only Apple product I have and will ever have is my iPod Classic. They are pretty easy to avoid but M$ is impossible to avoid. I have been wanting to make a complete switch to Ubuntu for years but I love playing Football Manager and Netflix so much that I have to keep my dual boot set up.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:02am

        Re: Re: I have sworn off Apple, MS will be much harder

        Whenever an entertainment product you want/like is made by or requires a product from unetical companies then it's time to find other ways to occupy your time.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:31am

        Re: Re: I have sworn off Apple, MS will be much harder

        "have been wanting to make a complete switch to Ubuntu for years but I love playing Football Manager and Netflix so much that I have to keep my dual boot set up."

        You could instead use an android tablet to do either of these, couldn't you?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        E. Zachary Knight (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:43am

        Re: Re: I have sworn off Apple, MS will be much harder

        Get a PS3, Wii or a Roku box if you want to watch Netflix. As for Football Manager, you could probably run it in Wine. 2011 and 2012 seem to have soem decent Gold compatibility. Live says Platinum.

        Two pieces of software is not worth supporting a company that you don't like.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:29am

    And a new Axis of evil is born...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Steven (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:39am

    Poor Engineers

    That has to be some really soul destroying work for the engineers involved. Knowing that you will never do anything productive. You will only ever be a drag and leach on successful companies.

    I almost feel sorry for them. Almost.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Benjo (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:47am

      Re: Poor Engineers

      Don't. They could choose not to work there.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      tdj, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:45am

      Re: Poor Engineers

      This is exactly what Apple is attempting to do to Kodak. Apple had a "temporary" legal victory on 5/21/12 with the ITC, but I honestly believe, this will be a patent battle that Apple will loose. It was already concluded by the USOP that Apple, RIMM, Samsung (who is now paying licensing fees to Kodak) and many other phone makers that use digital cameras infringed on at least one of the patents that Kodak is suing over back in 2010. Apples evil plan to stop Kodaks Chapter 11 reorganization by selling 1100 of its patents will not work. Looks like the giants philosophy is "We'll Just tie it up in court"!

      I believe Apple plans a backdoor/basement deal to acquire the 1100+ Kodak patents for almost nothing. Apple actually has the nerve to say that the patent in question is theirs....lmao!

      Worthless Maggots!!!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 5:40pm

        Re: Re: Poor Engineers

        There was an evil robot and good robot fighting.

        The evil robot had a multicolored apple on it, the good one was labeled IBM.

        Evil won.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 6:24pm

          Re: Re: Re: Poor Engineers

          Wait, whoa! When did IBM turn into saints? Are you sure your memory isn't a little short?

          Any sufficiently large corporation, given financial incentive, will eventually act in an evil manner to protect its potential gains. This is why corporations should not be considered people. As we do with war crimes, individuals should be held responsible for their actions, rather than hand-waving that they're responsible to some giant, nebulous, and unaware category of people called "shareholders" (or in the case of war crimes, "my country").

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 5:12pm

      Re: Poor Engineers

      From the article:

      Former coworkers might have found this a little strange, but it turned out that Widdowson liked the work he was doing. The mesh of the legal and technical work was a new challenge for him, but there was another reason he stuck with it. He felt like he was helping his former Nortel colleagues who were hurting because of the bankruptcy.

      So any sympathy is misplaced.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nathan F (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:49am

    "To Promote the Progress of Science and the Useful Arts" huh, maybe if the definition of "Science and the Useful Arts" means "Keep out all competitors because I don't want anyone taking my money"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DogBreath, May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:22am

      Re:

      Well, the secret interpretation of: "To Promote the Progress of Science and the Useful Arts" is now :"To Crush the Little Guy and Increase the Income of Patent Trolls and the Bank Accounts they keep".

      Please don't tell anyone about this, after all it IS a secret interpretation and we can't let just any of the off the street riffraff know about it. Oh... I'm on the internet... live??? Then, in the immortal word of Emily Litela: "Nevermind".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 12:26pm

      Re:

      Or perhaps you've made the fundamental error of mis-defining 'Science" and "Useful Arts"...

      If you're science is building a market where you are the only competitor and Useful Arts are convincing people to continue buying an inferior product instead of something better just because was made first.

      Setting parameters properly makes all the difference...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    anon, May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:51am

    What a shame!!

    Google managed to create an os that people want to use they created phones that are outselling the supposedly amazing apple and the failure that is windows phone. I think Google made a mistake in not getting the patents when they were up for offer. they could have stopped Apple and MS from ever bothering them again. Now they will have no option but to pay whoever billions of dollars just because they might have used a few lines of code they did not create themselves. Well, with the power google has i suspect they have a few retaliations they could choose from and we should see them in the not too distant future. But seriously is someone asleep at the wheel here , this is going to end in an almighty mess if it is not sorted out soon.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:15am

      Re: What a shame!!

      I, for one, would love it if positive things about Apple and Microsoft were replaced with the Bad News stories 'by technical error'.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      DannyB (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:36am

      Re: What a shame!!

      > I think Google made a mistake in not getting the
      > patents when they were up for offer.

      If these are the patents I'm thinking of, Google DID try to get them. Google made a huge bid. Google wanted to use them defensively against the bad guys who were already using patents against various Google partners.

      Because these patents would have represented a useful defense against patent aggressors, the bad guys got together and collectively outbid Google. That is how the bad guys (eg, Apple, Microsoft, etc) got these patents.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        NormM, May 26th, 2012 @ 1:06pm

        Good guys and bad guys?

        There are no good guys when it comes to patents. It's a war in which everyone is eventually forced to be as bad as their opponents. The only solution is to drastically revise the whole patent system.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    weneedhelp (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:56am

    He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

    I love it, when they do it they are called reverse-engineers. When we do it we are called hackers and get threats of legal action.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      weneedhelp (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:59am

      Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

      Which come to think of it aren't their "reverse-engineers" actually breaking the law with what they are doing? Typical hypocrites.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        :Lobo Santo (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:10am

        Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

        Historically, this is accurate.

        Freelance nautical robbery is referred to as piracy, while "for hire" nautical robbery is privateering.

        There's plenty of other examples too, that's just the first one which came to mind.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:26am

          Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

          Freelance nautical robbery is referred to as piracy, while "for hire" nautical robbery is privateering.

          Both could theoretically get you executed. Privateering was a little less risky so long as you didn't take out the ships of the country you were hired by or countries that weren't at war with that country. William Kidd was hanged for taking out English ships.

          The same could be true for freelance assassins vs state assassins, freelance gun runners and the Department of Homeland Security, etc. I like it though...now I can go into my boss and demand a pay raise because I am a freelance reverse-engineer.

          Reverse-engineering is still very much a gray area in the law...it usually is legal unless you violate the law, and there is a minefield of laws that could be violated.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            The eejit (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:44am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

            How can this possibly be legal? You are deliberately compromising the security of software to derive "infringement" of patents you didn't devise. Patents should be removed the minute the original company gets into trouble.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:47am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

              How can this possibly be legal? You are deliberately compromising the security of software to derive "infringement" of patents you didn't devise.

              I kinda gathered from reading the summary and the article that they didn't compromise the security in as much as they bought the product, learned how to use it from the tech manuals, and used a logic probe to figure out what it actually did, and then sat down with the lawyers and figured out which of their patents it violated.

              It is really sad, and a waste of good engineers, but something tells me that these guys probably weren't good engineers to begin with. I might be wrong, I often am, but as an engineer, sitting down all the time and talking to lawyers and not creating or working on products or making other people's lives worthwhile or better isn't my idea of a worthwhile engineering pursuit.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                John Fenderson (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:53am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

                It is really sad, and a waste of good engineers, but something tells me that these guys probably weren't good engineers to begin with.


                This.

                Most engineers want to do actual engineering, not this sort of thing. An engineer who does this for a living is one who can't get a real engineering job. There are some reasons why a competent engineer might not be able to land a real job, but it seems much more likely that they just aren't very good engineers.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            MrWilson, May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:04am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

            "it usually is legal unless you violate the law"

            Isn't that how all laws work?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              ltlw0lf (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:40am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

              Isn't that how all laws work?

              True. True.

              What I meant is that so long as you don't decrypt someone's ROT13 encoded copyrighted media (DMCA) or violate some trademark or patent, or stuff like that, you're ok. Clean-room reverse-engineering is the best, but there is also other just as legal though more grey methods of reverse-engineering.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        John Fenderson (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:02am

        Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

        Which come to think of it aren't their "reverse-engineers" actually breaking the law with what they are doing?


        Reverse engineering is a practice that has been upheld as legal numerous times in the courts. It is not illegal, and is a common and accepted practice in the industry.

        They could conceivably, however, run afoul of the DMCA's anti-circumvention rule.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Mike Masnick (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:12am

          Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

          Reverse engineering is a practice that has been upheld as legal numerous times in the courts. It is not illegal, and is a common and accepted practice in the industry.

          They could conceivably, however, run afoul of the DMCA's anti-circumvention rule.


          This. For all the people saying reverse engineering is illegal, it is not. There have been numerous examples showing that reverse engineering is actually considered legal.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            DannyB (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:57am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

            Sony vs. Connectix case (being discussed on Groklaw) points out that the result was that Connectix reverse engineering of Playstation was fair use of the internal private copies Connectix made of Sony's ROM. Connectix's compatible product contained no copies of any Sony code.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            JMT (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 6:04pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

            So what could/should/does happen when reverse engineering runs afoul of anti-circumvention laws?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        GMacGuffin (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:12am

        Re: Re: He's one of 10 reverse-engineers

        ...aren't their "reverse-engineers" actually breaking the law

        They are almost certainly violating the EULA or ToU.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Yartrebo (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:25am

    How is this legal?

    Pretty much any EULA I've ever seen for software, with the exception of open source, prohibits reverse engineering?

    Why does this troll get to do it, but normal people can't (at least not legally)?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      John Fenderson (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:47am

      Re: How is this legal?

      Why does this troll get to do it, but normal people can't (at least not legally)?


      First, an important bit of nitpickiness -- if something is contractually prohibited, such as in a EULA, that does not make it an illegal action. It makes it a contract violation, which is a civil, not criminal matter. The majority of the time, EULA's aren't really enforced. The cost/benefit of actually suing someone for breaking them is not often favorable. From a company's point of view, the value of the EULA is more to shield themselves from legal action more than to provide a means of taking legal action against others.

      Beyond that, EULA's are incredibly easy to get around. For example, they do not bind anyone not party to the transaction. If I pick the thing up secondhand or get it as a gift, the EULA does not apply to me.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Almost Anonymous (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 2:06pm

        Re: Re: How is this legal?

        Furthermore, most EULAs involve installing the software package. If you did not install it, but instead only decompiled the code, I'm pretty sure you would bypass EULA restrictions.

        Having said that, this patent troll company and its engineers are scum.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    rubberpants, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:35am

    It's great to see companies like Rockstar Consortium driving innovation and creating jobs. The system works!

    /s

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    orbitalinsertion (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:47am

    He's one of 10 reverse-engineers working full time for a stealthy company funded by some of the biggest names in technology... It examines successful products, like routers and smartphones...


    So the "thou shalt not reverse engineer, etc.," clauses these corporations are all so fond of are not binding upon themselves and unworthy of being respected. Once again, they are above the law and their own sets of rules. Oh well, they didn't obey those rules when they were young, either.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Lord Binky, May 23rd, 2012 @ 9:59am

    Well, I think these companies should recieve a licence for not pressing charges for breaking DMCA. Any protections count right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    GMacGuffin (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:20am

    Rockstar not bound by reasonable license?...

    ...the reason that the antitrust effort was dropped was because Apple and Microsoft promised to license the key patents under "reasonable terms." But... Rockstar is not subject to that agreement.

    This is either complete hogwash, of fully disingenuous, contract-law speaking. Usually a contract will say that it flows to agents; if not, the law will generally hold the principal liable for agents' acts; and mostly, the law don't like folks trying to do an end-run around the clear intent of an agreement.

    Seems MS & Co. would have a hard time legally proving "we agreed to reasonable licencing terms, but those working for us on the very subject of the agreement are not bound by its terms." Bull...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      GMacGuffin (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 12:22pm

      Re: Rockstar not bound by reasonable license?...

      Correction: In reading the underlying article, we see the "legal" end-run, where Rockstar was actually transferred the patents.

      Correction: That would be "disingenuous pricks."

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    mlang (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 10:37am

    Why are politicians refusing to recognise the problems with IP laws? Surely there's enough lobbying power amongst those being hit to get through to more policy makers?

    There really needs to be a big media campaign to highlight the damage being done to world economies - but, post-SOPA, would any big media channels cover it?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Jonathan, May 26th, 2012 @ 4:17pm

      What problems?

      They can ignore, deny or beat down dissent. Wealth and power are being pumped to the overclass fairly reliably. As far as the political class is concerned, everything is operating properly.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:08am

    That seems quite problematic, and perhaps worthwhile for the government to reopen its investigation...

    Now why would they do that? With startups strangled by absurd patent thickets, business will keep going overseas. Then they'll be able to keep getting votes by grandstanding about China stealing jobs. Plus, since the economy will stay bad, they'll be able to keep passing off their power grabs as "jobs bills".
    Politics is like medicine. There's more money in keeping patients sick than there is in making them healthy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 11:27am

    Turn his own quotes around...

    So, this Rockstar Consortium - they could become Facebook or Google now because they own the patents right?

    I mean, if having the patents is what it takes to become the business model they describe, then we should see all these patent trolls becoming the companies that they claim have infringed on their business models and innovations.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Thomas (profile), May 23rd, 2012 @ 12:59pm

    Just goes to show..

    that patents are there only to stop innovation. It is all but impossible to design, build, or program anything these days due to patents, and lots of patents conflict in different countries. patents benefit only lawyers and the businesses that hold them. The big businesses simply have so much fighting each other! They absolutely want to block all new players to the game. It's sort of like a monopoly - if you aren't here now you can't join the party.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 23rd, 2012 @ 8:20pm

    Linux. Was. Here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2012 @ 12:54pm

    Sgsigflgdo ujhyiehsg is The Code

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    patent litigation, May 28th, 2012 @ 11:52am

    marketplace, anyone?

    Although IP owners have every legal right to engage in patent enforcement to protect their assets, nevertheless it would be refreshing to see mega-corporations stop using wasteful patent litigation to resolve disputes that really belong in the marketplace.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 28th, 2012 @ 2:58pm

    Where's the meat

    I wonder where all the supporting documentation for those patents ended up

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 28th, 2012 @ 3:00pm

    Where's the meat

    I wonder where all the supporting documentation for those patents ended up

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Fred Smith, May 29th, 2012 @ 8:31am

    everyone has it backwards

    the problem is these patents are valued and are real property. the 'innovators' are stomping all over these inventions and desire to continue to do so for free; the problem is copying or using other ideas is NOT innovative

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Fred Smith, May 29th, 2012 @ 8:32am

    everyone has it backwards

    the problem is these patents are valued and are real property. the 'innovators' are stomping all over these inventions and desire to continue to do so for free; the problem is copying or using other ideas is NOT innovative

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This