Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by comex | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

comex

Taking legal action against FRAND abuse is hardly unique to the US.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/12/european-commission-to-is...

See also Mueller on this veto; while I often disagree with him, I tend to agree on this issue:

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/08/obama-administration-veto...

View on HN

The problem I have with this argument, is, isn't the point of every technological advance to become widespread and Standards-Essential? If we're going to disallow them, why have patents at all? For "Look-And-Feel" patents?

Because even strong software patents often have alternatives, and weak ones are easy to find an alternative to, decreasing their value, but once a standard protocol requires their use, the patent holder can jack up the price. As an extreme example, consider the exFAT patents: there are many file systems superior to exFAT that have no need for whatever bits of functionality Microsoft patented, but because Windows speaks exFAT as one of few alternatives, some companies have licensed them. Not exactly a standard, but the same idea.

Apple was offered the same terms as everyone else but they "decided"that this wasn't fair and demanded special treatment.

Apple is the one not following the FRAND spirit here.

The ITC specifically considered FRAND, so interesting that you or the perpetually wrong troll Mueller decide that it is abuse.

Well, evidently the ITC "considered" FRAND inaccurately, as their decision conflicted with both, the Obama Administration and the European Commission. (Not to mention the opinions of jurists such as Judge Posner.) You could cry "protectionism" on this veto, but what excuse could you make for the EC's actions?

Bizarre how you group in multiple completely different actions and pretend that they're one. And the Obama Administration didn't make a statement about FRAND or the correctness of the ITC's judgment -- they simply decided that they'd rather not have an American company's products blocked.

Completely different actions with precisely the same underlyng issue: abuse of standards essential patents. Bizarre how you do not notice this.

And this is not a new issue, and not just restricted to the smartphone patent wars. The same criticisms were made and similar outrage was outpoured in the semiconductor industry when Rambus tried to pull similar shenanigans. [1]

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambus#Lawsuits

Reply on news.ycombinator.com