Microsoft, IBM Want to Seal Patents Agreements With Samsung

sfcrazy writes "The court battle between Apple and Samsung has created the possibility of disclosing the cross patent agreement between Microsoft and Samsung. Microsoft is suddenly scared and has filed a motion asking the court to seal the cross license agreement. I would like to remind that the Judge has asked both parties to make all the filings in this dispute available to the public for free." And on Monday, IBM filed for a restraining order to prevent Reuters from publishing their agreement with Samsung as well.

Microsoft is suddenly scared?

[HearVoic]

Wait, what now? Slashdot's summaries are starting to get quite childish. Microsoft is scared, really?

It couldn't even barely be possible that Microsoft wants to follow the mobile companies common practice of cross licensing almost all of their patents.

This includes one of the pioneers of mobile industry, Nokia, as well as they could stop licensing their technology and make the other companies really suffer. But the armchair generals and armchair CEO's on Slashdot think everything is outright war between technology companies. In fact it's not.

Re:Microsoft is suddenly scared?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is far more likely that different companies get different rates depending on how well they negotiate and how much they have to offer in return (standard practise by all of the big boys). Revealing details of such agreements puts them at a disadvantage in any future negotiations and hence the demand for non disclosure is pretty standard. This has nothing to do with fear of anything but the disadvantage they would have in future price bargaining.

Re:Nerf bat in play

[Pieroxy]

Methinks we're going to see who the real villains are in this story. Apple may be evil and all, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Note that Apple being villain and all is all due to the fact that they make their patent dispute public, unlike the rest of the field which hides it under a thick veil of secrecy. I'd be very interested to know exactly who gets paid what over there.

"We all lose cool tech"

[Kupfernigk]

I doubt that is true. What this is really about is monopolistic business practices in the US and how they distort the global market. I suspect that the US Government doesn't actually want too much light shed because then the EU competition commission might get involved, and that might shame the US equivalent into action.

However, I doubt any of it is much of a brake on real technical progress. The limitation on that, at the moment, is battery technology. And that has been the limitation on mobile technical progress since the first mobile phones.

Re:Microsoft is suddenly scared?

[Vintermann]

Microsoft does not want to disclose which patents they're using to get royalties for Android/Linux. Apart from the VFAT patent, it is not publicly known which 235 patents Microsoft claim to own that cover the Linux kernel - they only reveal that to parties they approach to intimidate, a really bizarre and perverse state of affairs if you ask me.

Re:Nerf bat in play

[Dupple]

If differing companies are paying differing licensing rates on the same patents it would change all future negotiations. It's no wonder MS and Motorola have filed emergency motions. Who is charging how much for what is something that I doubt most companies want revealing. Particularly Microsoft, with it's claims against Andoid. We know of FAT and probably activesync, but they claim patents on a great deal more.

What I'd like to see is the consequences of this case eventually shedding light on the US Patent Office and why some of the more dubious patents are granted. This case could easily be far wider ranging than it first appears.

They want other corporate partners not to know

[tstrunk]

In my opinion they don't want to keep only the public from viewing these agreements, they want the other corporate partners not to know the details, because they could use it to renegotiate the terms.

Imagine this hypothetical situation:
Microsoft has an agreement both with Sony and with Apple. They both agreed on different but confidential patent agreements.
Sony paid (or swapped) more than Apple.
Apple releases their agreement.
Sony sees this and has a reason to renegotiate.

Re:Nerf bat in play

[Chuck Chunder]

The reason it is public is because Apple are using their patents in the courts to restrict competition from entering the market rather than licencing for a reasonable sum to make money.

I don't think this has anything to do with "image". Rather they realise that this is a critical time in cornering a market that will continue to pay off for them for a long time.

Just like the iPod made the iPhone purchase a "no brainer" for many people the iPhone makes (or will make) the iPad or Apple TV (etc etc) a no brainer. Once people are invested in the iTunes/Appstore ecosystem they are more likely to stay there (and keep spending more money there).

Removing credible alternatives to the iPhone from the market doesn't just mean more iPhone sales now, it means more recurring sales down the road too.

Re:What is there to hide ?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about the patent deals, not the patents themselves. It is a lot more likely that both companies are afraid of being investigated for monopolistic behavior if those deals become public knowledge.

More than likely it has to do with the various companies they've cross-licensed with finding out who got sweetheart deals and who got totally screwed over.

"Hey, why am I paying ten times what he's paying?!?!"

Re:What is there to hide ?

[Bleedorang3]

Patents are open to the public. Patent licensing agreements however are not. How is this hard to understand? Between your childish use of 'M$' and your complete lack of knowledge about what the article is about it seems pretty obvious which side you're on. Also, Microsoft is scared? What the hell Slashdot. This used to be the place I came for real tech news. Not some user's blatant bias.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion