MS/Acacia news item discussion

[foxyshadis]

From this thread (https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1054870#post1054870).

I'm not sure Microsoft really has anything to do with this, it's likely a coincidence. Acacia as a company is nothing more than a group of patent lawyers (plus some managers/execs) who go out and try to sue everyone pretty indiscriminately for anything close to their many dubious patents, shaking down people who can't afford a court case. They buy bad patents by the barrel just looking for the one in ten payoff, and they perfected the reviled patent troll stereotype. Plus they've been rattling the saber at open source since long before this guy joined.

Of course, the traits that make one a good microsoft exec might make one a good exec in this business, that's for you to decide...

There's certainly a good chance they might've been in a strategic position to know details of Novell technology thanks to the sharing, and took that with them, though. I'd bet it's more about getting a personal payoff with that knowledge, but hey, follow the money and it might just lead back to Microsoft legal.

[setarip_old]

try to sue everyone pretty indiscriminately for anything close to their many dubious patents, shaking down people who can't afford a court case.See Acacia's 9/30/06 10Q (Quarterly SEC filing) at:

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/061109/actg10-q.html

The following is a list of some of the companies they had brought suit against - hardly "people who can't afford a court case" ;>}

Lexmark International, Inc.
Dell Computer Corporation
LG Philips LCD
Toshiba Corporation
Toshiba America Consumer Products, LLC
LG Electronics, Inc
VIA Technologies, Inc.
Via Technologies, Inc. (USA)
Intel Corporation
The Kroger Company
Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
Linens N Things, Inc.
Costco Wholesale Corporation
Circuit City Stores, Inc.
Officemax Inc.
Staples, Inc.
Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.
Fry's Electronics, Inc.
Rite Aid Corporation

On the original point of the "news" item, I guess one could likewise speculate that since Mr. Taub had also previously worked for Nortel, that Nortel is also part of a perceived conspiracy. Obviously, this is illogical.

Also, referring to Acacia as an "affiliate" of Microsoft has legal ramifications, such as common ownership or executive management, neither of which appears to be the case.

[foxyshadis]

That's just open lawsuits, things that never make it to filing or have been filed and dismissed between quarters never get listed. The big ones are usually the only ones who can even afford to let it go to court, but even in just that list there's a number of regional cable companies and small web sites. Because there are no legal records of pre-filing settlements, you have to rely more on anecdote and actions like attorney general complaints, so it's impossible to back up all the accusations leveled against them over the years, but you have to admit they make a pretty compelling case.

[Wilbert]

If you think i need to change something in that news item, or word stuff differently, please do say so.

[[P]ako]

Wilbert, the site is too quick to link MSFT with this case. The fact that an excutive that works with Acacia worked previously at Microsoft proves nothing. We could even say that McDonalds is involved since he laid his first job there.

MSFT just made a huge agreement with Novell and RedHat, why would they want to sue them?

[foxyshadis]

I agree it's news that they're being sued, but there probably shouldn't be any link to microsoft, since it's a single bit of extremely circumstantial evidence. If more comes to light later, then sure. (I'll probably hold the personal greed theory at least until the trial starts, if it ever does.)

Besides, perhaps more importantly, it's a UI suit and not related to video, so it might just not be relevant.

[Wilbert]

MSFT just made a huge agreement with Novell and RedHat, why would they want to sue them?
MS made no agreement with Red Hat, and an empty one with Novell. All kinds of important stuff was exempted (patents regarding Office suites and other ones) from the patent deal. Why wouldn't make MS an empty patent deal with Novell and stab them in their back? It wouldn't be the first time.

[[P]ako]

All right, I was wrong, it wasn't RedHat, it was SUSE.

MSFT is making money out that "empty patent deal". Money they weren't making before. If Novell goes out of business, MSFT loses money. The article is biased, period.

The article should be about Acacia suing yet another company out of some obscure patent interpretation. Which it is all what they do for a living.

[communist]

ako;1055456']All right, I was wrong, it wasn't RedHat, it was SUSE.

MSFT is making money out that "empty patent deal". Money they weren't making before. If Novell goes out of business, MSFT loses money. The article is biased, period.
MS mad a deal with Novell the distributor of SuSE ;)

MS is not making any big additional money from that deal (if any at all). The patent clause was an after thought by MS. Its specifically set in place so they can go around and spread their FUD about IP infringement and how every other Linux distro (except the few who paid the protection money) ows them money. It also only 'protects' only the customers of MS and Novell from both companies. Its an empty protection that as Wilbert already pointed out excludes most of the stuff (see 'clone products'). MS and Novell are still free to sue each other for patent infringement.

I'm most certain this will help MS in spreading the "Linux is not [IP] safe" crap.

Regarding this lawsuit - it really is quite a coincidence that one day Ballmer is on the record to spread his IP/FUD and leveling the playing field again and the next day you get those law-suits.
There is no protection from patent-trolls.