- Status
Upendra09
Distinguished
- Mar 4, 2009
- 3,174
- 0
- 20,960
[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]Traditional Microsoft tactics. Copy and Destroy. We're talking pre-buy_out_all_your_competitors here. This is Microsoft's bread and butter business strategy we're talking about. Although, with all the blacklash they've gotten from the EU recently (and to a lesser extent, the meaningless anti-trust decision from the U.S. government years ago), you'd think they'd be less blatant about it.[/citation]
It works though. and the EU thing was just plain stupid so you can't blame them for that.
It works though. and the EU thing was just plain stupid so you can't blame them for that.
"who the hell is i4i anyway, i have never seen their company B4, if they can hold a patent but do nothing with it the guys in DC needs to wake up."
Seriously, if this were a movie, the main character would say something sarcastic about weeping for the species about now. All this week I've been reading posts just like this one by people either too lazy or too stupid to look up a single thing about this company or this case before posting. Hell they can't even be reading the actual articles they are commenting on or reading any of the other posts. Some days I think the internet, and instant access to "news" that has not been researched thoroughly and presented in complete form, with all the facts and details about the subject matter, and spread through message boards, RSS feeds and twitter messages has lowered the collective intelligence of the human race.
Seriously, if this were a movie, the main character would say something sarcastic about weeping for the species about now. All this week I've been reading posts just like this one by people either too lazy or too stupid to look up a single thing about this company or this case before posting. Hell they can't even be reading the actual articles they are commenting on or reading any of the other posts. Some days I think the internet, and instant access to "news" that has not been researched thoroughly and presented in complete form, with all the facts and details about the subject matter, and spread through message boards, RSS feeds and twitter messages has lowered the collective intelligence of the human race.
Drag0nR1der
Distinguished
- Oct 7, 2007
- 245
- 0
- 18,680
wow, no longer allowed to sell office!! thats gonna be a big pain for businesses. It's a shame, I like the new version of word, its management of referencing, bibliographies etc. is a welcome improvement over old versions.
scuba dave
Distinguished
- Jun 1, 2009
- 342
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]master9716[/nom]I4I got 300million that they didnt deserve. Thats like Pantening thecopy and paste feature or the find feature excat same thing , 300 million is WAY overboard for a little shit company[/citation]
Try and say that when, and IF you ever invent something, or come up with a completely original idea of your own, and somebody WILLING, and in full awareness of the illegality of their actions, stole it anyway.
300 million? Sure, its ALOT of money, and probably more than any losses Word might have caused them(i4i), but one key point to remember is MSFT wanted to render them obsolete!Aka, STEAL their idea illegally, and put them out of business with it(or at least out of the genre). THAT deserves a HEFTY fine. One that HURTS the wallet so they get it through their skulls that breaking the law ISN'T worth it.
Try and say that when, and IF you ever invent something, or come up with a completely original idea of your own, and somebody WILLING, and in full awareness of the illegality of their actions, stole it anyway.
300 million? Sure, its ALOT of money, and probably more than any losses Word might have caused them(i4i), but one key point to remember is MSFT wanted to render them obsolete!Aka, STEAL their idea illegally, and put them out of business with it(or at least out of the genre). THAT deserves a HEFTY fine. One that HURTS the wallet so they get it through their skulls that breaking the law ISN'T worth it.
You guys are obviously deluded noobs at understanding the business world. Companies such as Microsoft all have patents on their latest technologies and ideas as you well know. However, tendency for these patents to cross paths with other companies ideas is very large. The only thing refraining large companies from raining fire upon each other over patent infringement is a sort of deterrence. For example, Amazon won't sue Microsoft for patent A because Microsoft would then counter-sue Amazon for patent B. Smaller companies like i4i don't have those legal liabilities and thus feel free to sue Microsoft over a routine corporate practice by many companies. Is it right for them to file aggressive patents? No, but is it the norm? Yes. What are you going to do about it? All of these potentially erroneous moves all benefit the consumer in additional services and capabilities of the software so get over it. In summary, Microsoft's not the only player in the ballgame doing this popular stunt, and they certainly won't be the last.
Sources: My aunt is works for Microsoft in its legal & acquisitions division.
Sources: My aunt is works for Microsoft in its legal & acquisitions division.
andy_newton
Distinguished
- Mar 5, 2009
- 112
- 0
- 18,680
We're not allowed to buy it anymore? Good, I still use Office 2003 SP3 with "file format converter" and "compatibility pack SP1". So when I need 2007, let's just pirate it.
-ND
-ND
- Jul 24, 2006
- 22,927
- 293
- 57,490
mikeynavy1976
Distinguished
- Feb 14, 2007
- 454
- 1
- 18,815
This is a tough situation. While Microsoft should definitely be punished if they indeed "willfully" infringed on a patent, our patent system definitely needs a revamp. Who is i4i? Sounds like another company that gets patents just to make others pay to use it...when they had no intention of bettering society with them. That should be illegal right there. Once a company has a patent they need to do something to keep it. I am also appalled (yet again) at how juries cam come up with these exhorbitant awards. i4i should get adequate compensation...the compensation they asked for, as long as there are calculations and economic evidence to back up the claim. Juries should not be able to raise awards in cases like this...or award money of any kind for crimes/injustices that didn't involve money in the first place. Lawyers are milking the broken legal system, and the juries are somehow getting some cut...or other benefits (i.e. free legal service for life or something).
Leonlee's comment was probably the most intelligent so far.
"You guys are obviously deluded noobs at understanding the business world. Companies such as Microsoft all have patents on their latest technologies and ideas as you well know. However, tendency for these patents to cross paths with other companies ideas is very large. The only thing refraining large companies from raining fire upon each other over patent infringement is a sort of deterrence. For example, Amazon won't sue Microsoft for patent A because Microsoft would then counter-sue Amazon for patent B. Smaller companies like i4i don't have those legal liabilities and thus feel free to sue Microsoft over a routine corporate practice by many companies. Is it right for them to file aggressive patents? No, but is it the norm? Yes. What are you going to do about it? All of these potentially erroneous moves all benefit the consumer in additional services and capabilities of the software so get over it. In summary, Microsoft's not the only player in the ballgame doing this popular stunt, and they certainly won't be the last."
Few things to note:
-Im a linux user and support fully open source.
-I don't fully understand nor care to understand why they are getting sued again
-MSFT wont stop because for every 300 mil they lose they make 100000000... more (get over it)
The last point is the most important so yes they in a way can be above the law I am not happy saying that as much as you MSFT haters don't like hearing it but its true. Also i agree that the sum of money was a bit excessive i mean not to look down on a company that "created something special" but at this point in time or maybe even in the future could they even get this sum of money out if it. and for the ones thinking about the willing infringement refer to the quote above.
"couple pennies from me to you"
"You guys are obviously deluded noobs at understanding the business world. Companies such as Microsoft all have patents on their latest technologies and ideas as you well know. However, tendency for these patents to cross paths with other companies ideas is very large. The only thing refraining large companies from raining fire upon each other over patent infringement is a sort of deterrence. For example, Amazon won't sue Microsoft for patent A because Microsoft would then counter-sue Amazon for patent B. Smaller companies like i4i don't have those legal liabilities and thus feel free to sue Microsoft over a routine corporate practice by many companies. Is it right for them to file aggressive patents? No, but is it the norm? Yes. What are you going to do about it? All of these potentially erroneous moves all benefit the consumer in additional services and capabilities of the software so get over it. In summary, Microsoft's not the only player in the ballgame doing this popular stunt, and they certainly won't be the last."
Few things to note:
-Im a linux user and support fully open source.
-I don't fully understand nor care to understand why they are getting sued again
-MSFT wont stop because for every 300 mil they lose they make 100000000... more (get over it)
The last point is the most important so yes they in a way can be above the law I am not happy saying that as much as you MSFT haters don't like hearing it but its true. Also i agree that the sum of money was a bit excessive i mean not to look down on a company that "created something special" but at this point in time or maybe even in the future could they even get this sum of money out if it. and for the ones thinking about the willing infringement refer to the quote above.
"couple pennies from me to you"
@darksmac
CMIIW, but in my understanding of the patent, even Write of OpenOffice is infringe this patent, and possibly StarOffice too (read the patent please).
The question is why i4i only sue Microsoft, instead sue all of the company who infringe the patent (including Sun for OpenOffice).
i4I might be realize that there's no money to sue from OpenOffice so instead the focus on only Microsoft where the money is huge. The probably think since they only sue for $25 millions, the Microsoft just give them the money quietly and easily. Dead wrong ....
Smells like greedy to me
CMIIW, but in my understanding of the patent, even Write of OpenOffice is infringe this patent, and possibly StarOffice too (read the patent please).
The question is why i4i only sue Microsoft, instead sue all of the company who infringe the patent (including Sun for OpenOffice).
i4I might be realize that there's no money to sue from OpenOffice so instead the focus on only Microsoft where the money is huge. The probably think since they only sue for $25 millions, the Microsoft just give them the money quietly and easily. Dead wrong ....
Smells like greedy to me
Wow MS steals some small companies idea makes lots of money from it. They get sued and lose i am supposed to feel sorry for them. Worse yet they know that they infringed on somebody's else right and think screw and do it on paper. If you knowingly do something and get caught then pay. 290 million i wished i owned that company right now
ethanolson
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2009
- 318
- 0
- 18,780
I bet i4i had no marketable product that would've yielded anywhere close to $200M. That tells me that the lawsuit system is broken when this judge and/or prosecuting attorney is involved!
scryer_360
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2007
- 564
- 0
- 18,980
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Willful infringement? That changes things. A reasonable payout to i4i for its losses is fine, but exhorbitant amounts for "special damages" will just raise prices for everyone.[/citation]
Wow, what and ID10T statement to make. "Don't let anyone get sued and be forced to pay damages if it means higher prices."
Probably a member of the AARP aren't you? Why is it that conservatives whinos like you will say things like "higher prices merr!!!" but then when insurance companies charge an arm and a leg just so they can drop you, you call that "freedom?"
Wow, what and ID10T statement to make. "Don't let anyone get sued and be forced to pay damages if it means higher prices."
Probably a member of the AARP aren't you? Why is it that conservatives whinos like you will say things like "higher prices merr!!!" but then when insurance companies charge an arm and a leg just so they can drop you, you call that "freedom?"
scryer_360
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2007
- 564
- 0
- 18,980
[citation][nom]jamesl[/nom]the judge sucks, the jury sucks, i4i sucks and all you people suck MS did nothing wrong, this is a stupid ass lawsuit for a stupid ass patent[/citation]
Stupid patent agreed, but stupid lawsuit? If i4i had a patent, they own the rights to it.
Many other companies claim utility patents all the time, Westinghouse used to live off them. Get used to the idea that stupid patents exist.
Stupid patent agreed, but stupid lawsuit? If i4i had a patent, they own the rights to it.
Many other companies claim utility patents all the time, Westinghouse used to live off them. Get used to the idea that stupid patents exist.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Review Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080 Founders Edition review: Incremental gains over the previous generation- Started by Admin
- Replies: 224
-
News Bill Gates says Intel has lost its way, hints that 'brave' Pat Gelsinger exited too soon
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 48
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram