Ahh nice Microsoft
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne May 21, 2009 7:38 AM EDT |
All they want is to charge license fees for shonky patents, who'd a thought.... |
| kingttx May 21, 2009 12:52 PM EDT |
This effectively leaves upstarts in a lurch since, like the article states, they don't have a large patent portfolio they can leverage to cross-license. Instead, they gotta pay up! |
| phsolide May 21, 2009 7:53 PM EDT |
Pull quotes from the article:
Quoting:He also calls IP "the single greatest wealth-creating asset of the modern corporation." The word "wealth" is the giveaway. "Wealth" means on-the-books value like a stock portfolio or a real estate holding, before you sell it. I believe that's the modern sense of the word. Quoting:Everyone else was welcome to partner with the new Microsoft, but Phelps quickly learned that many companies were wary of doing so. A big part of the reason was the "non-assertion of patents" clause that Bill Gates had dreamed up in 1993 and inserted into just about every Windows contract. Wow! There's your de facto patent pool. The existence of a patent pool explains the long term lack of innovation. A recent research paper (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1308997) looks at historical evidence, and finds that innovation in the field of sewing machines ceased while a patent pool was in effect. Very nice for MSFT and all its hangers-on in the Windows Ecosystem, not so good for the rest of us. Beware of patent pools, and other de facto devices to create oligopolies. |
| caitlyn May 21, 2009 8:35 PM EDT |
I take it ta meant nice for Microsoft, not that Microsoft was somehow being nice. Microsoft is always nice... to Microsoft's bottom line and nothing else. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!