Xbox 360 should be banned in the US, says judge
Microsoft and Motorola battle in court.
An administrative law judge has declared that the Xbox 360 should be banned in the US.
The ruling is part of an ongoing patent dispute between Microsoft and Motorola between the 4GB and 250GB S models of the Xbox 360, which saw the device almost banned in Germany earlier this month.
Courthouse News reports that Judge David Shaw also said that the US should prevent sale of the machines with a cease-and-desist order, and that Microsoft should post a bond equal to 7% of the declared value of unsold Xbox inventory already in the country.
I have no idea how much that is, but I bet it's loads.
Microsoft has argued that 7% is too high, instead suggesting it pay 2.5%. Motorola, on the other hand, has said Microsoft should pay 100%. I don't think Motorola really understands how to haggle.
Microsoft also said that Shaw's exclusion order doesn't service the public interest, because consumers would be left with only the PlayStation 3 and Wii for their console gaming needs. Shaw rejected the argument, stating that Sony and Nintendo could probably meet the increased demand.
Shaw determined in April that Microsoft had infringed on four Motorola patents, related to "secure wireless communication and transmission of video content between controller devices and game consoles."
What happens if Shaw's determination and recommendation becomes final? President Barack Obama will have 60 days to review the decision.
Highest Rated Comment
ReadySteadyGo@ Clockpunk
User Comments
munkee
Again, as duster says, if you patented something, then another person was infringing on your patent, would you be cool for them to keep selling it. Especially when they are refusing to pay you for it? I'd take it through court too.
Now to take another example of this; Microsoft are selling something that isn't theirs to sell. Motorola asked for a lot of money to use it and Microsoft are stamping their feet saying they want it cheaper.
GAME were selling something that wasn't theirs. EA asked for a lot of money. GAME stamped their feet saying they want it cheaper. EA cut them off.. You know the rest.
Wido@ pblive
p0rtalthinker@ ReadySteadyGo
pblive
Where's Phoenix Wright when you need him?
Clockpunk@ squidman
That summary above, though, is only what I read from the case...
squidman@ Clockpunk
ReadySteadyGo@ Clockpunk
Clockpunk
However, Motorola have waited for their initial license with Microsoft to expire (having hitherto been all above board), and demand a significant ($4 billion) sum to carry on this agreement, which is far beyond what any other licensee has to pay. That is why Microsoft filed suit initially.
Before this nonsense began the MPEG LA pool (which contains 2,339 patents on H.264, contributed by 29 different companies) was paid an annual royalty capped at $6.5 million. If the cap didn't exist, the amount would be $60 million, but that was the deal.
Motorola holds only 50 of the individual patents in this pot, but want $4 billion to themselves, which microsoft have argued is not Fair, and a breach of the FRAND clause specified in Motorola's patent.
...
I find it very suspect that the judge is going along with this, personally...
Wido@ dav2612
dav2612@ Wido
tvr77@ Wido
Wido@ tvr77
tvr77@ Endless
Why would they be grateful of someone using there designs without permission and without gaining anything from it. Motorola have put the work and funds into it so they they should be in the loop. The only reason we know now is because of Motorola are taking them to court.
Rules are rules but i think an Xbox ban would be total overkill!
dudester
In this case it might be two big companies who can afford the courts more then anyone but these laws are in place for the likes of us if we made a great idea and I would hate if it was made easier for big companies to roll over people and take what they want. (plus it would probably be the end of dragons den!)
Clockpunk
That encapsulates everything wrong with the patent system as it is.