Re: TomTom to contest Microsoft patent lawsuit ..

[amicus_curious]

"Doug Mentohl" <doug_mentohl@linuxmail.org> wrote in message 
news:goj2jr$rp4$1@news.datemas.de...
> amicus_curious wrote:
>
> > > Wouldn't it be simpler for the endusers to go to the Update Site ..
>
> > How could Tom-Tom prove that they did?  The hammer would be on Tom-Tom as 
> > an infringer a  ..
>
> That's assuming Tom-Tom are found guilty. The code would be available on 
> the server. All MS has to do is point it out. As such and in a court of 
> law, it is up to the plaintiff to prove the case not the other way round.
Yes.  I said "if Tom-Tom were found to be infringing...".  Could they avoid 
paying by getting all their customers to download new, non-infringing 
firmware?  NO is the answer.

> > Tom-Tom would have to show that they were made non-infringing.
>
> No, MS has to prove the Tom-Tom are infringing. Come on fuddie, you are 
> out best lawyer her on COLA.
After being found infringing is what I said.  Come on, read the posts.

> > > .. software that infringe the Microsoft PAtents are manufactured for 
> > > TomTom N.V. by third parties located in Asia ..
>
> > That is the software created by Tom-Tom, I would think.
>
> The words expressed are 'third parties' or does it display different on 
> your monitor. What are the names of these 'third parties'. Will they be 
> contesting the case. Why won't MS name them.
OK.  I don't see where it matters, but change the statement to "software 
manufacture for Tom-Tom".  The law is still not going to allow Tom-Tom to 
distribute the product in the USofA without a license if it can be shown 
that the devices infringe on the Microsoft patents listed.  If Tom-Tom has 
some agreement with the third parties to be compensated for any 
infringement, Tom-Tom can get their money back from the third parties. 
Microsoft probably doesn't care who pays as long as someone pays.  Why would 
they care?

> > here is no "third party" as such ..
>
> Do you suffer from a particular form of word blindness where you don't 
> actually see what you don't want to see. The words "third party" appear in 
> the complaint. Wishing very hard for them to go away - won't work.
>
> > why bother with the overseas parent? ..
>
> Cause they might lose ..
If Microsoft loses in US court against the US subsidiary of Tom-Tom, I doubt 
that they will pursue it any further.

> > > > > What effect on MSs entire patent portfolio would it be if MS lost this 
> > > > > case?
>
> > > > It could encourage other companies to dispute patents held by 
> > > > Microsoft, but that is always the case.
>
> > > But what effect would it have on the monetary value of the MS patent 
> > > portfolio.
>
> > I am sure it would be less than it might be now,
>
> What and why would it be less. Would it increase or decrease its value? 
> Why would an event in the future influence an event in the past.
>
> > What it might be worth otherwise is moot.
>
> You mean that losing the case would increase its value. otherwise may be 
> moot but then since the value of the IP portfolio can only be judged of 
> value in court, it is certainly not moot.

I think you meant "decrease".  What I am saying is that the IP has no stated 
value on the Microsoft books.  It is, rather, part of what is termed "good 
will" which consists of the aggregate value of Microsoft;s stock minus the 
book value of its physical assets and the aggregate total of its debts.  No 
one ever tries to measure that number unless the company is being acquired 
by another.