nsane.forums Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 LG has become the latest in a long line of Android handset vendors to sign a patent licensing agreement with Microsoft. The agreement allows the South Korean conglomerate to use Microsoft patented technology in phones, tablets, and other consumer electronics running both Android and Chrome OS.This is the eleventh agreement between Microsoft and Android-using OEMs, with other licensees including Samsung, HTC, and Acer. In total, Microsoft says that more than 70 percent of all Android smartphones sold in the US are covered by a similar patent agreement. The only major manufacturer now without a license agreement is Motorola Mobility.Terms of the agreement were not disclosed, but the form is likely to be comparable to that of the other license agreements, which all involve payment of a royalty to Microsoft for each handset sold. View: Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted January 12, 2012 Administrator Share Posted January 12, 2012 Waiting for a time when this whole patent system is thrown out or fully remade. -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweety.Abd Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Waiting for a time when this whole patent system is thrown out or fully remade. -_-I doubt if that will happen, but I too hope that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shought Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 The patent system will be redesigned at some point, at least that's what I expect, but nobody knows how long it will take...Patents are a good thing insofar that they promote the innovation etc., but when they are used to 'suck out' the market patents completely miss their goal. How do we fix this? Simple. After a corporation manages to earn back the innovation costs (defined as all the costs made in order to innovate/create the particular product the patent is assigned to) the patent should be immediately dropped. Sure, there are bookkeeping 'tricks' to extend the period, but it will always be sooner than the 10 (in some countries even 20) years 'rigid system'. It makes sure that (1) innovators are 'protected' for as long as their bookkeeping allows them (at most x years), (2) that these innovators are also motivated to create a product which earns back the costs within x years (the current system already does this) and (3) that these 'patent monopolies' (patents are effective 'short-term' monopolies) run out as soon as a product becomes profitable, allowing other vendors to pick up; thus distributing (previously) patented technologies throughout the industry in a faster way, causing companies not to focus on extrapolating as much as possible from their x years monopoly, but forcing them to take yet another step on the innovation ladder.Sure, this would drop the motivation to innovate a little and many would argue that there is never enough motivation to innovate, but at what cost? Crippling the market system, that's what cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 patents should only be 10 years period. after that time to much changes are made that those patents are worlthless or slowing/stoping growth. as with software, they should NEVER be patent period. just copyrighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.