http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2012/05/...n-recommended/Things seem to be going from bad to worse for Microsoft. At the start of the month the Xbox 360 was handed a distribution ban in Germany. That saw an appeal and is still tangled up in legal hearings. Now, a judge from the International Trade Commission has recommended an import ban on the machine entering the United States and a block on all sales of existing stock.
Microsoft’s argument against the ban – which is recommended due to a copyright infringement claim by Motorola – is that it would leave consumers with limited options. Judge David Shaw counters that argument with unintentional hilarity by saying that Sony and Nintendo can probably deal with any extra demand. It’s a little bit strange that Microsoft would insist that a potential copyright infringement would be okay, as long as it offers more consumer choice but it seems equally odd that access to other games consoles be used to defend the recommendation. Surely they either broke Motorola’s copyright or they didn’t?
Previous blocks on import and distribution of games consoles in the US and Europe have always been challenged, leading some to claim that bans were never in place. These legal challenges are very real though, and even if they rarely stop the sale of goods, they offer up significant hurdles for manufacturers to overcome. These patent wars only seem to be getting worse.
Judge Shaw’s recommendation will now be discussed by the commissioners on the ITC and if they agree it will be passed on to the president’s advisors for a final decision.
Results 1 to 25 of 53
Thread: US Xbox 360 Ban Recommended
US Xbox 360 Ban Recommended
Maybe now my friends will shut up about that Ps3 Blackout last year....
AaronSOLDIER likes this post
Just another company out for a buck. They will settle, 360 sales will continue... this is a non-story.Imagine something witty here
Microsoft currently has Motorola by the balls as Motorola has to pay Microsoft for every Android phone that they sell. Motorola is simply responding in kind as a professional courtesy.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Didn't they win in Germany though?
05-23-2012 #7Microsoft’s argument against the ban is that it would leave consumers with limited options. Judge David Shaw counters that argument with unintentional hilarity by saying that Sony and Nintendo can probably deal with any extra demand.
I want to see it happen. It might bump up the release of xbox720 and it would make for a funny e3. But I doubt any ban will happen.
Thing is, another company tried the same thing with Office not too long ago, saying MS violated some obscure patent about the xml language used to integrate MS Word into Office and connect all of the Office programs together.
They wanted an immediate ban on sales of all versions of Office.
Same song, different subject here. Court battles may be won, but this is for sure never going to see fruition.Imagine something witty here
05-23-2012 #11Thanks to Kwesnoth for the sig!
TheCinemaJack Movie Reviews!
05-23-2012 #12Soldier 95BGuest
Here’s all the patents Microsoft is using, and Barnes & Noble’s rebuttal:
I. ’372 Patent (Web Browser Background Image Loading)
The ’372 patent was filed April 18, 1996. Very generally, the patent relates to an outmoded system for retrieving an electronic document like a webpage that includes an embedded background image, which may have a bearing on very old web browsers connected to the Internet via slow, dial-up connections, but has little application in the context of improved, modern Internet connections….
II. ’522 Patent (Operating System Provided Tabs)
The ’522 patents was filed December 13, 1994. The patent relates to a single, simple tool provided by an operating system (such as Windows) that allows applications running on that operating system to have a common look and feel. Since operating systems provide many such tools, the patent amounts to nothing more than a trivial design choice. In particular, and despite the fact that this concept is in the prior art, the ’522 patent’s method allows for the creation of tabs. The tabs are analogous to dividers like those found in a notebook or to labels found in a file cabinet, and allow the user of an application to navigate between multiple pages of information in the same window by clicking on the tabs….
III. ’551 Patent (Electronic Selection with “Handles”)
On its face, the ’551 patent purports to claim priority back to a November 10, 2000 filing date. Generally, the ’551 patent relates to another simple and trivial feature that is not only disclosed by numerous prior art references, but is certainly not central to an operating system like Android — selecting or highlighting text or graphics within an electronic document. The patent provides that a user selects a word or phrase, for example, by tapping on a touch screen display or clicking with a mouse. Such a selection may be shown by highlighting the selected word or phrase. The user is presented with “selection handles” on one or both ends of the selected areas. These “selection handles” can be moved by the user to highlight more or less text or graphics….
IV. ’233 Patent (Annotation of Electronic Documents)
The ’233 patent was filed December 7, 1999. Like the other Microsoft patents, the ’233 patent relates only to one small feature that has long been present in the prior art and is not central to Android or any other operating system. More specifically, the patent generally relates to a method for capturing annotations made in an electronic document (like an electronic book), without changing the electronic document itself….
V. ’780 Patent (Web Browser Loading Status Icons)
The ’780 patent was not filed until May 6, 1997, long after the first web browser came to market. In addition to being late to the game, the patent is directed to a very simple and obvious feature — a temporary graphic element or status icon that is displayed to indicate that a hypermedia browser (such as a web browser) is loading content. When a browser is intended for use with a portable computer system with a limited display size, the ’780 patent notes that it is desirable to maximize the browser’s content display area (the portion of the browser that actually displays a website, not the menus, toolbars, or buttons). Thus, the patent makes a trivial design choice and provides that the graphic element or loading status icon is to be temporarily displayed in the content display area of the browser as opposed to a separate space such as the browser’s menu bar, tool bar, or a separate status bar….
Is one of many examples.
This probably won't end well...........for Motorola.
05-23-2012 #15Ride or die Sony(Playstation) supporter since 12/25/1997 Currently playing: Mass Effect 3, NBA 2K14, Tomba,Battlefield 4,Warframe, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows
Holding down Turtle Power since 1991
Will be a BIG ASS settlement...
This one will likely be bigger, but even still, MS won't be overly stung. If this was going to be some monumental case, or one potentially so large in settlement that it would be highly damaging, this would be in national news, not internet news only.Imagine something witty here
05-23-2012 #20Soldier 95BGuest
If it happens, it will be a drop in a bucket for MS. They are a monopolistic 800 pound gorilla. They don't care about a settlement amount!
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Wigan, England
- PSN ID
- Rep Power
There's no lesson here. Apple, Samsung, nearly every company has been involved in a copyright case.
They will settle and move on, no detriment, no problem, just move on like most all other companies do.
Here's the rest of the story being reported from IGN:
The recommendation alone doesn't ban the import of the two console models – a panel of six judges on the ITC board will review Shaw's recommendation and decide whether it should be made into law. Florian Mueller of patent site Foss Patents told GamesIndustry International that it's unlikely Shaw's recommendation will make it past its current point. "Unlike judges at courts, ITC judges don't make the decisions: they merely recommend them. Their recommendations are very frequently not adopted by the Commission, the six-member decision-making body at the top of the ITC," he said.
Moreover, Mueller pointed out that he's "never seen an ITC judge make any other recommendation than an exclusion order [the import ban in question] if his initial determination is that there is a violation." And given Shaw's initial determination earlier this year that Microsoft was in violation of Motorola's patents, today's news is actually "normal course of business," said Mueller.
Last edited by Cuguy; 05-23-2012 at 22:06.Imagine something witty here
05-23-2012 #24Soldier 95BGuest
So in other words, nothing to see here, lol.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)