Marcos El Malo

Oh, please. There will be hookers and priests, too.

I mashed my thumb on recommend ten times, but it only registered once.

Race you to the patent office. Ready, set, go!

Whats the point spread?

Aaaaaaaaaaarghhhh!

Well, Groklaw is most definitely NOT a Google fan site. They are exactly like a Google fan site, they never (afaik) have anything negative to say about Google, they’ll tear you a new asshole then ban you as a troll if you ever say anything critical about Google, but THEY ARE NOT A GOOGLE FANSITE!

Because Google is freeing us from Apple and Microsoft with their gift of Android, and Android is open, practically, almost, more or less GPL (except the Apache license is not anything like the GPL, Google runs as fast as it can from the GPL).

The other thing I like about Groklaw is the total lack of internal contradictions and hypocrisy.

I think you might have posted this to the wrong thread. I wasn’t discussing FRAND definitions. My use of the word reasonable as to characterize etwashoo’s question. I’d been a little hard on him before, and wanted to show my appreciation for what I thought was a good question.

If you intended to repy to my comment about SEP, then apparently you are replying before reading. :/

Some say that Androids are better.

Some say the iPad is better.

Many on either side can get quite emphatic in defending their preference.

Which do you like better?

There’s no proof! Saying something doesn’t make it so. Providing links to others that are saying it doesn’t make it so either.

Mueller has disclosed his relationships, so one can decide for oneself. I’m not sure where you found Mueller claiming that he provides ‘“independent” knowledge’ of the various cases (whatever that means).

Didn’t Apple also agree to recognize the Samsung standard in place of their own if Samsung also offered a license to their patents royalty free?

Presumably he means victim in the sense that moto wasn’t the attacker. That’s what I gather from the context.

This does rather point out the absurdity of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as either a patent strategy or a nuclear one. The collateral damage to innocent parties is just too great to justify it. The fact that Moto is the “victim” doesnt justify their hurting the world at large in order to defend themselves. It’s sort of like blowing up an entire city because you got mugged in one of its neighborhoods.

Lol. But there’s the small problem of the other holders of all the other h.264 patents. The ones that Google was warning us about.

The U.S. court was already involved. The case there predates the one in the German court. A small but maybe important fact.

It’s slightly more complicated than that. Motorola and MS have essentially the same case going on before the U.S. judge, a case that predates the German one. The judge isn’t so much asserting geographical jurisdiction (which would be utter nonsense) as he is asserting temporal jurisdiction. In oversimplified layman’s terms, the judge is telling Motorola, “Don’t go mucking about before we have this settled here in my court.”

How do you figure that is wrong? What is a FRAND commitment if not a contractual obligation?

Anyway, the U.S. court isn’t forcing or trying to force other courts to abide by its decision. It’s only requiring that Motorola do so because Motorola was already involved in a dispute before the court that predates the German case.

You have a reasonable question there, etwashoo. The answer is that, when you have a number of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) underlying a standards based technology, each patent, by definition, is equally essential. So the “quality” of the patent is not so relevant in this case.

If I may misapply an outrageously hyperbolic analogy that fails on many levels:

It’s like Google warning people from going down a dark alley because they might get stabbed by a thief. As soon as someone sets foot down the alley, Google knifes ’em in the back, chuckling, “I told you so,”

Innuendo, slander, and accusations do not constitute proof.

And my argument isn’t a straw man argument, because it wasn’t an argument. It was a satirical jab at the tone of the fandroid mindset. Maybe I should have put a /s flag on the end, to signal the mentally slow. Oh, wait, I did!

What is the legal definition of “Fair and reasonable”?

Nor can they specifically point to anything that shows Mueller is twisting the facts in favor of his clients. Actually, this is more due to their own laziness. For example, the first paragraph of a FOSS patents post today:

Nokia just announced that it takes new steps to protects its intellectual property and today filed patent infringement lawsuits in the U.S. and three German courts against HTC, ViewSonic and RIM. All in all, 45 different Nokia patents are being asserted in one or more of these actions.

If Mueller was objective and unbiased, the paragraph would read something like:

Microsoft puppet Nokia hatefully spewed that it will be raping kittens, throwing acid into the faces of orphans, and abusing the patent system to try and kill the One True Mobile OS, The Android given to us by the all beneficent Google (long may it profit from our personal information and targeted ads!). Nokia will be underhandedly backstabbing valiant Google handmaidens HTC and Viewsonic. Also, RIM, but nobody cares about RIM anymore. All in all, Nokia is seeking to enforce 45 totally frivolous patents that no sane patent office would ever have granted to begin with, besides which, all patents suck unless they’re owned by Google or aGoogle ally. Open source rulez, proprietary drools!

See? That’s how Mueller would write if he weren’t a paid shill, if he were truly honest and objective.

/s for the slow

Well, possibly, except for the possibility that WebM violates H.264 patents!