Microsoft and Google sling the corporate mud

Earlier today we reported that Microsoft inked a patent deal with Samsung over its Android products. This is obviously a bit upsetting for Google as another one of their vendors has been pulled in to the Microsoft domain by having to pay to produce a Google product. Not wanting to sit around and get trampled on, Google issued a statement about this agreement.

The statement comes via TechCrunch and is pasted below:

This is the same tactic we’ve seen time and again from Microsoft. Failing to succeed in the smartphone market, they are resorting to legal measures to extort profit from others’ achievements and hinder the pace of innovation. We remain focused on building new technology and supporting Android partners.

The word choices used by Google show their strong detest for this agreement. Google goes as far to say that Microsoft is extorting its partners to suck away their profits. The reality is, Microsoft apparently has a strong case against Android, otherwise so many vendors (especially Samsung who in their own right is a massive corporation capable of defending themselves in court) would not have agreed to Microsoft's terms.

But not to be outdone, Microsoft, unofficially responded to Google's accusations. Frank Shaw, lead corporate communications for Microsoft, responded with the following tweet below:

Clearly, Shaw is instigating that Google is simply crying over the fact that Microsoft has them in a corner with their patent portfolio and even the pending acquisition of Motorola is not stopping vendors from signing deals with Microsoft.

This latest round of corporate mudslinging shows the volatility of this business. Even if you agree or disagree with Microsoft's tactics with their pursuit of Android, it's nothing personal, it's just business.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Dell looking to introduce more Windows Phone devices in India

Next Story

Windows Phone 7.5 gets a suggestion box

51 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Ahh! Google, you just make me giggle at all this cry baby accusations, while microsoft is taking the "evil genius" approach and cashing in your mobile platform, by OEM licensing instead of wasting innovative time in court with you. You are not in the best position to be discussing enterprise extortion, didn't you extort PayPal over Google wallet? and what about yelp? Please Google stop being a cry baby by taking cheap shots, you can take the adult approach by going to court(Oh wait you're already guilty).

"Microsoft apparently has a strong case against Android, otherwise so many vendors (especially Samsung who in their own right is a massive corporation capable of defending themselves in court) would not have agreed to Microsoft's terms."

No, Samsung can't defend themselves as they need Microsoft for Windows PCs and WP7 devices. Not defending patents in court is pure extortion and protection money.

alexalex said,
"Microsoft apparently has a strong case against Android, otherwise so many vendors (especially Samsung who in their own right is a massive corporation capable of defending themselves in court) would not have agreed to Microsoft's terms."

No, Samsung can't defend themselves as they need Microsoft for Windows PCs and WP7 devices. Not defending patents in court is pure extortion and protection money.

Don't be stupid, MS has already been found guilty of being a monopoly on the PC side with Windows. IF they even so much as tried to use the Windows PC side to "extort" Samsung in any way Samsung would have an easy day in court and would get paid for it's trouble as well. Please, for once, get a clue and stop spitting out baseless accusations.

Does anyone actually know that IP's Microsoft are forcing people to license anyway? I know there was something about the FAT patent, but pretty much all Linux distros use that and we don't see MS picking on them... So what, exactly, are the IP's that MS has that are in Android?

lol they are using Microsoft technology and it want them not to pay anything google want everything for free

to google Microsoft is ****ing you Hard

subcld said,
lol they are using Microsoft technology and it want them not to pay anything google want everything for free

to google Microsoft is ****ing you Hard

And which MS tech google is using ?

If Google had actually gotten their legal affairs in order and offered legal protection like Microsoft does with its Windows Phone 7 partners none of this would be happening. And given that Google was sued over some Java patents it leads me to believe that Google didn't do their homework on these matters. Of course, this just goes to add to the chorus of there's a problem with software patents all around...

Hopefully this will push Google to improve its patent portfolio (the Motorola buy was good for that), hammer out licensing as needed, and get around to offering its partners some real protection against patent issues, both legitimate and the troll-ish variety (like LodSys suing iOS and Android developers).

Microsoft has historically always been this way, stomp out their competitors who typically have better ideas than they do, rather than innovate themselves

Cash Money Billionaire said,
Microsoft has historically always been this way, stomp out their competitors who typically have better ideas than they do, rather than innovate themselves

Troll, go troll elsewhere.

Cash Money Billionaire said,
Microsoft has historically always been this way, stomp out their competitors who typically have better ideas than they do, rather than innovate themselves

+1
And how anyone can possibly defend Microsoft when it does things like this is beyond me.

Joey S said,

And how anyone can possibly defend Microsoft when it does things like this is beyond me.

So you think that anyone has the right to infringe anybody's IP…

Joey S said,

+1
And how anyone can possibly defend Microsoft when it does things like this is beyond me.

Why do some people think MS isn't just a patent troll this time?

Well, first because licencing and patent deals are very common in the mobile market. Only because a product is open source does not change the rules, even if some people may take it too personally.
Most of the time Microsoft doesn't even acknowledge open source products that are using some of their IP, as long as they are not selling it for profit reasons.

And, as we've seen many times now, these companies (HTC,etc.) are not naiv or helpless little babies; if they think that there is something wrong, you can bet that they would sue each other.
Therefore, noticing that MS has made an agreement with nearly every creator of Android phones, it is not stupid to assume that this is maybe something more substancial than a new gesture to unlock the screen.

Well, honestly, we're all the peanut gallery here; unless we all became patent experts with all the evidence for the situation? All we're doing is spouting opinions based off our biases. For some company X is automatically wrong, for others they're in the right, with everyone else inbetween in a myriad of fashions.

Sam not Spam said,
Well, honestly, we're all the peanut gallery here; unless we all became patent experts with all the evidence for the situation? All we're doing is spouting opinions based off our biases. For some company X is automatically wrong, for others they're in the right, with everyone else inbetween in a myriad of fashions.

Very well said!

Cash Money Billionaire said,
Microsoft has historically always been this way, stomp out their competitors who typically have better ideas than they do, rather than innovate themselves

First of all tell me why is HTC and Samsung are fighting off Apple but agreed to licence Microsoft's IP. Apple is a bigger company ; If HTC and Samsung are ready to fight Apple why not Microsoft. It's because MS has a case here

Joey S said,

+1
And how anyone can possibly defend Microsoft when it does things like this is beyond me.

Microsoft has historically always been this way, stomp out their competitors who typically have better ideas than they do, rather than innovate themselves

Oh of course, it's not like Samung is a big company at all. Oh wait, they're a massive company that brings in almost 3x as much money as Microsoft does.

Hmm then maybe its because they don't like lawsuits. Oh wait they're counter suing Apple.

Well then the only logical answer is that Lee Kun-Hee (CEO of Samsung) is sleeping with Steve Ballmer. Oh wait no, you two are just trolls.

gawicks said,

First of all tell me why is HTC and Samsung are fighting off Apple but agreed to licence Microsoft's IP. Apple is a bigger company ; If HTC and Samsung are ready to fight Apple why not Microsoft. It's because MS has a case here

Or maybe it's because it's less expensive to pay than go to court. Apple doesn't want to settle that's why they are fighting.

chrilo said,

Why do some people think MS isn't just a patent troll this time?

Well, first because licencing and patent deals are very common in the mobile market. Only because a product is open source does not change the rules, even if some people may take it too personally.
Most of the time Microsoft doesn't even acknowledge open source products that are using some of their IP, as long as they are not selling it for profit reasons.

And, as we've seen many times now, these companies (HTC,etc.) are not naiv or helpless little babies; if they think that there is something wrong, you can bet that they would sue each other.
Therefore, noticing that MS has made an agreement with nearly every creator of Android phones, it is not stupid to assume that this is maybe something more substancial than a new gesture to unlock the screen.


google should use debians free sofware guidelines

The bottom line is that Google didn't want to pay for the licensing fees for ActiveSync like Apple did to get access to MS Exchange. If they did, they wouldn't be able to claim that Android is "Free". The reality is that if you want to use someone's technology, you have to pay for it. This is one clear case where Microsoft is right and Google is wrong. There are probably other pieces of MS tech that are there as well, but we definitely know this is the case with ActiveSync. Of course the HW manufacturers didn't have to use it, but then Android would be DOA for the enterprise. Google... Man Up and pay for the licensing the way Apple has.

Thing is (if i'm not wrong) Apple and Ms has a patent agreement that gives them access to each others patents.

I think this was a VERY smart move on both parties, Google thinks that gaining marketshare is the key and breaking the corporate rules while doing so is "ok", as long as the public is on board hence the "do no evil" mumbo jumbo.

I really dislike google for that sole reason - they think they can break the rules and get away with it because they bribe the public somehow (empathy, freebies etc etc).

This "shady" business from google is international but not well known. They refuse to pay taxes on most countries if they think they can get away with it (yea, this is fact, i'm not spreading fud here). Every nail on any of their products is a blessing in my opinion.

Besides, their way of building software is not something i enjoy - feels just like it's been "slapped on".

Waah..And Apple is doing the same thing with Samsung. That seems to be how the system works plus Google is so successful with android that this should just be a bump in the road.

Varoon said,
Waah..And Apple is doing the same thing with Samsung. That seems to be how the system works plus Google is so successful with android that this should just be a bump in the road.

But Apple isnt doing the same thing with Samsung. Microsoft is not in a position of power in the areas where that involve these patents because they are the 3rd player in the game. So they just say here is what it costs, the vendors say ok, sign the bottom line and everything in life keeps spinning.
Apple on the other hand because they are currently the "big fish" are not saying here is what agreements cost because if they did then they would be allowing direct competition that could (note I said could) allow someone else to come in and knock them off the top. So they resort to we own these and you cant have them or known as using their position to attempt to control the market.
Call me a history buff but isnt that what almost got Microsoft broken up in the 90s?

If Google hadn't stolen Sun source code, and made use of patented Linux bits, this would not be an issue.

Google are the ones at fault here, yet it is everyone else taking the flack!

mdtaUK said,
If Google hadn't stolen Sun source code, and made use of patented Linux bits, this would not be an issue.

Google are the ones at fault here, yet it is everyone else taking the flack!

Exactly. And I'm sure that wasn't all they stole and from everyone they stole...

mdtaUK said,
If Google hadn't stolen Sun source code, and made use of patented Linux bits, this would not be an issue.

Reusing API function prototypes needed to implement the standard is hardly stealing. As far as patents covering parts of the Linux kernel, well those have never been tested in court. The most notorious being the so called FAT patent. I doubt that would hold up in anyway, that's why Microsoft prefers to threaten than risk invalidation.
mdtaUK said,

Google are the ones at fault here, yet it is everyone else taking the flack!

Google's not the one going around suing everyone from Tomtom to Motorola over highly dubious patents. Microsoft can't compete fairly, so it uses the broken patent system to maintain and increase its hegemony.

Joey S said,

Google's not the one going around suing everyone from Tomtom to Motorola over highly dubious patents.

So you really think that companies like HTC and Samsung would pay to license these "dubious" patents just because Microsoft wants them to and not because they seem to be valid…

Joey S said,
Google's not the one going around suing everyone from Tomtom to Motorola over highly dubious patents. Microsoft can't compete fairly, so it uses the broken patent system to maintain and increase its hegemony.

So it's alright for other companies to protect their IP but not Microsoft.

Fail Troll is Fail.

Joey S said,

Reusing API function prototypes needed to implement the standard is hardly stealing. As far as patents covering parts of the Linux kernel, well those have never been tested in court. The most notorious being the so called FAT patent. I doubt that would hold up in anyway, that's why Microsoft prefers to threaten than risk invalidation.

Google's not the one going around suing everyone from Tomtom to Motorola over highly dubious patents. Microsoft can't compete fairly, so it uses the broken patent system to maintain and increase its hegemony.

If reusing API prototypes as you put it isn't stealing then why oh why is Google in the process of settling with Oracle, and going to have to pay them billions probably, if they "did nothing wrong"? It seems what you think they did and what Google actually did don't match.

Android is as far from open as office is, just come to turns with it already so we can move on. There's as much proprietary code stuffed into it from Google side (for it's services and whatnot) that any OEM who wants to just use it on it's own gets the short stick. Look at all the cheap "android" devices that have zero support for google services/apps and no access to the android marketplace and then ask yourself why.

GP007 said,
If reusing API prototypes as you put it

Sigh, a "prototype" is a type of class in object orientated programming, it's not how he puts it, it's actually how it is. If you want to know what it means, well I suppose you could Google it.

At least Microsoft would rather license their intellectual property rather than sue. Unlike Selfish "APPLE" who would rather sue instead of license their intellectual properties.

jesseinsf said,
At least Microsoft would rather license their intellectual property rather than sue. Unlike Selfish "APPLE" who would rather sue instead of license their intellectual properties.

Exactly what I've been saying all along, to bad that most of the Fandroids on this site don't see it that way though.

jesseinsf said,
At least Microsoft would rather license their intellectual property rather than sue. Unlike Selfish "APPLE" who would rather sue instead of license their intellectual properties.

+1

jesseinsf said,
At least Microsoft would rather license their intellectual property rather than sue. Unlike Selfish "APPLE" who would rather sue instead of license their intellectual properties.
Since the companies are licensing Microsoft's IP's, I'm assuming they're legitimate. As such, this is definitely a win/win situation as Microsoft does have to protect their IP (such is the price of ownership) and the companies get to continue business as usual. Of course, the fact that relatively few people buy their smartphones outright means the actual cost isn't directly passed on anyhow due to carrier subsidization.

jesseinsf said,
At least Microsoft would rather license their intellectual property rather than sue. Unlike Selfish "APPLE" who would rather sue instead of license their intellectual properties.
They're two different companies with two different business models.

Elliott said,
They're two different companies with two different business models.

At least Apple defend its patent in court (win or lose) and not in a dark back room with a gun at the head (Windows licences..)

alexalex said,

At least Apple defend its patent in court (win or lose) and not in a dark back room with a gun at the head (Windows licences..)

Be serious for once, if you can. First step in any business dispute over IP is to look for a licensing deal, if no deal is met you then sue. The fact Apple would rather just skip the first step and go to the final one is because they live off of their hardware, anything that cuts into their hardware sales is bad for business. MS lives off of licensing it's software, it doesn't care who sales more of XX phones or XX tablets as long as it gets it's license fees.

billyea said,
"it's nothing personal, it's just business"

They sure act like children for being "just business".

You gotta vent the steam