Showing posts with label bully. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bully. Show all posts

02 September 2012

Apple's Pyrrhic Patent Victory

The reaction to the jury's decision in the US patent infringement case between Apple and Samsung has been rather remarkable. I've seen it called all kinds of turning and inflection points for the computing/mobile world, as if we are entering some strange new era whose landscape is weird and unknown to us. This is utter nonsense. I don't think Apple's "stunning" or "total" victory - all phrases I've seen bandied about - is particularly stunning, or even a victory. 

On Open Enterprise blog.

05 October 2011

New UK Banknote Celebrates James Watt, Patent Bully and Monopolist

As do many nations, England likes to put images of its great and good on banknotes. In a somewhat quixotic attempt to stem the decline of what little manufacturing remains in the country, the governor of the Bank of England has come up with the following idea

On Techdirt.

03 October 2011

Microsoft-Samsung Licensing Deal Tells Us Nothing About The Facts, Just About The FUD

As Bessen and Meurer's book "Patent Failure" points out, one of the biggest problems with software patents is their lack of well-defined boundaries. This makes it very hard to tell whether newly-written code is infringing on existing patents or not. The threat of treble damages for wilful infringement removes any incentive to try to find out. 
On Techdirt.

03 June 2009

Standing up to the Playground Bully

The EU is contemplating some further action against Microsoft:

Frustrated with past efforts to change Microsoft Corp.'s behavior, European Union regulators are pursuing a new round of sanctions against the software giant that go well beyond fines.

The regulatory push is focused on a longstanding complaint against Microsoft: that it improperly bundles its Web browser with its Windows software. Rather than forcing Microsoft to strip its Internet Explorer from Windows, people close to the case say, the EU is now ready to try the opposite measure: Forcing a bunch of browsers into Windows, thus diluting Microsoft's advantage.

The sanctions would come from an EU investigation that began last year. In a sign of how rapidly the case is progressing, these people say, the possible penalty has emerged as a key focus in discussions between the parties.

Inevitably, this suggestion has led to whining about how nasty those eurocrats are, and how unfair to pick on little old Microsoft, and what a crimp on innovation all this is.

How utterly pathetic.

What we are seeing is teacher starting to get heavy with the playground bully - one who, despite a decade of warnings, continues to abuse its monopoly position. What we are seeing is an institution that finally has both the will and means to place limits on what are acceptable business practices.

Of course, forcing Microsoft to give people a choice of browsers when they start up Windows will make little difference to the that market, but that's not the point. The point is the punishment - a further reminder that Microsoft is under scrutiny, and that further serious financial sanctions are always an option. It's absolutely the *right* thing to do, because Microsoft's behaviour for the last two decades has been absolutely the *wrong* thing to do, and it is finally being called to account.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca.

11 December 2008

Standing up to the Bully-Boy Lawyers

Davenport Lyons have engaged in such morally-repugnant behaviour that they are fast becoming one of the worst possible advertisments for their profession. At last, someone is calling their bluff:


Lawyers for the consumer rights lobby Which? have filed an official complaint to the body that regulates solicitors over Davenport Lyons' campaign of letters alleging illegal filesharing.

For several months Davenport Lyons has been sending letters to individuals accusing them of pirating videogames via peer-to-peer networks, and demanding £500 on behalf of rights holders. The London-based law firm recently branched out into threats on behalf of producers of hardcore gay porn.

Now Which?, formerly known as the Consumers' Association, has reported Davenport Lyons to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). Announcing the move, Which? said it had drawn regulators' attention to the detail of Davenport Lyons' letters. The complaint includes claims they "make incorrect assertions about the nature of copyright infringement; ignore the evidence presented in defence; and increase the level of compensation claimed over the period of correspondence".

The only positive aspect of this sordid case is that Davenport Lyons are bringing the whole idea of enforcing copyright into such disrepute that the general public will turn against it sooner rather than later.

Update: If you should be unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end of any of this, there's great advice here about what to do.

05 September 2008

AT&T: Proud of its Pathetic Patent Pathology

I thought the image in this post was only vaguely amusing, and so didn't bother pointing it out. But now that AT&T wants to add bullying to greed and stupidity, I feel obliged to urge you all to rush over and look at it *really* hard.... (Via Boycott Novell.)

01 May 2006

Epson Joins the IP Bully Club

Sad to see a once-great company joining the IP Bully Club, using dubious logic and bad law in an attempt to shut out competition. Hint: thriving outfits just don't need to adopt such tactics...(via Techdirt).