Microsoft Makes $2B A Year From Android Patents

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I knew Microsoft made a boatload of money off its Android patents every year but I didn't know it was over $2 billion. :eek:

Microsoft is generating $2 billion per year in revenue from Android patent royalties, says Nomura analyst Rick Sherlund in a new note on the company. He estimates that the Android revenue has a 95% margin, so it's pretty much all profit.
Click to expand...
 
Who cares? I would do the same thing if it could earn me 2 billion mega bucks.
 
Did MS ever specify which patents they hold that is actually forcing all the Android manufacturers to cough up? I've been wondering about this for quite a while.
 
PCunicorn said:
Who cares? I would do the same thing if it could earn me 2 billion mega bucks.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article. The author suggest that the Xbox division should be spun off because the profits from Android hide how bad the Entertainment and device division is really doing. "Investors are blind to Xbox's struggles, says Sherlund, because they are "concealed by the hugely profitable Android royalties." The Xbox is a bigger money loser than most people realize.
 
EndlessRed said:
Did MS ever specify which patents they hold that is actually forcing all the Android manufacturers to cough up? I've been wondering about this for quite a while.
Click to expand...

Nope and I think their refusal to even say how they THINK people are infringing without them signing NDAs should be grounds for forcing disclosure or invalidating their patents entirely.

At this point it's just legalized extortion.
 
The 2Bn $ are spent on the holes made by the rest of the division, and according to Rick Sherlund, senior analyst with 25 years of expertise at Goldman Sachs, personal friend of Bill Gates and who has followed MS since the original IPO, the biggest hole is the Xbox division, which kinda explains why the investors want said division out.


http://www.businessinsider.com/micr...er-year-from-android-patent-royalties-2013-11


As for the patents, here they are:
http://androidcommunity.com/barnes-noble-reveals-microsofts-android-patents-in-detail-20111114/
 
That article is a joke, it's asking Microsoft to sell off the xbox brand and pull out of the gaming industry. It doesn't really matter what their losses are if they're integrating a box in every home that uses Skype, Live subscription fees, marketplace, advertising on internet browsing/streaming TV, and data mining.
 
I doubt it's as high as $2bn. Something like that would be in the SEC filings.
 
-PK- said:
That article is a joke, it's asking Microsoft to sell off the xbox brand and pull out of the gaming industry. It doesn't really matter what their losses are if they're integrating a box in every home that uses Skype, Live subscription fees, marketplace, advertising on internet browsing/streaming TV, and data mining.
Click to expand...

Exactly these investors are purely short term investors that do nothing but sit around all day hoping MS will do it then their stock will pop after they will sell then MS slowly decline when they realize that leaves the entire living room wide open for android in smart TVs etc.. and MS has nothing to answer with.
 
More proof that the US patent system is total BS and in desperate need of an overhaul.
"Big" companies like MS and Apple extort billions a year from other companies over trivial patents that should never had been issues in the first place. Other companies start patenting BS to charge other companies to offset their patent costs...
Lawyers get involved, end user prices soar, we all get screwed.
If the current patent system were overhauled, some companies would just collapse. Nintendo would probably still be #2 and Microsoft would not be in the console business after the travesty that was the original Xbox.
 
SGA76 said:
More proof that the US patent system is total BS and in desperate need of an overhaul.
"Big" companies like MS and Apple extort billions a year from other companies over trivial patents that should never had been issues in the first place. Other companies start patenting BS to charge other companies to offset their patent costs...
Lawyers get involved, end user prices soar, we all get screwed.
If the current patent system were overhauled, some companies would just collapse. Nintendo would probably still be #2 and Microsoft would not be in the console business after the travesty that was the original Xbox.
Click to expand...

Ya because it would be so much better if anyone could just come in and steal your ideas and make it cheaper without fronting any of the research costs and risks.
 
rudy said:
Ya because it would be so much better if anyone could just come in and steal your ideas and make it cheaper without fronting any of the research costs and risks.
Click to expand...

You have to admit some of the patents are very fucked up. Some of them are so simple and pretty much common across many things. Some things very much deserve patents, even software advances. But, when everything from the icon shape to the swipe gesture, it starts to lose it's value as a system. They aren't patenting ideas to protect their investment, they are patenting every little thing of their product to maximize their profit and eliminate any competition in the field.

Suppose someone patented the wheel. Just a broad patent, covers all wheels. That would mean one distributor for any wheeled vehicles, trailers, etc.. Unless, of course, they licensed the wheel, which would be expensive.

Give credit where credit is due, but keep it reasonable. I've invented several things, but couldn't afford the patent. Seeing my idea on the store shelves a year or so later sucked. But, some things are patented that shouldn't be....
 
Some patents that are pretty messed up are probably not the driver of this trend. Its the massive amount of patents that MS has from decades of research and development vs Android makers wanting to just jump in and give away a product for free so they can kill the competition. If it was messed up patents these very rich companies could probably easily challenge and defeat them.
 
rudy said:
Ya because it would be so much better if anyone could just come in and steal your ideas and make it cheaper without fronting any of the research costs and risks.
Click to expand...

He didn't say do away with the patent system. He said the current system is BS and needs an overhaul. It does.
 
That's funny because last I checked almost every innovative software maker that mattered is USA originated. I guess the patent system here is just so broken it is inhibiting all that amazing innovation that is popping up every other day in all those other countries with superior patent policy.
 
rudy said:
That's funny because last I checked almost every innovative software maker that mattered is USA originated. I guess the patent system here is just so broken it is inhibiting all that amazing innovation that is popping up every other day in all those other countries with superior patent policy.
Click to expand...

I'd sure like to know how Apple justifies trying to patent things like square buttons with round corners, rectangular devices, a gear for settings or phone logo for making calls on a button (which existed LONG BEFORE the iPnones) and touchscreen interface. Same for MS on their patents like a resizable progress bar to show page load speed and clickable menue interface. It doesn't matter if its coded different, the concept itself is patented.
If that's the case, since Tesla invented, provided a working model and patented wireless recharge in the days of Ben Franklin, the multiple copycat patents Apple owns should be invalidated just sticking to that same train of thought.
Its riddiculous. Its like patenting the turning wheel, not the mechanics that make the wheel turn.
We have such double standards when it comes to patenting its sickening.
The SYSTEM is need of an overhaul. It doesn't need to be laid to rest, it needs OVERHAUL.
 
SGA76 said:
I'd sure like to know how Apple justifies trying to patent things like square buttons with round corners, rectangular devices, a gear for settings or phone logo for making calls on a button (which existed LONG BEFORE the iPnones) and touchscreen interface. Same for MS on their patents like a resizable progress bar to show page load speed and clickable menue interface. It doesn't matter if its coded different, the concept itself is patented.
If that's the case, since Tesla invented, provided a working model and patented wireless recharge in the days of Ben Franklin, the multiple copycat patents Apple owns should be invalidated just sticking to that same train of thought.
Its riddiculous. Its like patenting the turning wheel, not the mechanics that make the wheel turn.
We have such double standards when it comes to patenting its sickening.
The SYSTEM is need of an overhaul. It doesn't need to be laid to rest, it needs OVERHAUL.
Click to expand...

Once again which country has a better patent system that has resulted in superior innovation and support of its software industry?

Second it is most likely none of you know the inside information on the patents that you claim are so horrible. Second in any system as large and complex as the USA certain patents are going to slip through the cracks and will be challenged and invalidated. And of course in some cases a bad patent will stick. But over all it has worked decently well. Maybe you should stop believing any click bait you see and actually dig into the patents and the rulings and see if its really as bad as you think.

For instance the last ruling against Samsung for apple is specific to implementation of head phone detection, and multi touch screen heuristics. Doesn't say anything about a square icon with rounded corners.
 
Godmachine said:
Investing intelligently in patents that will be utilized is "greed" :confused:

You need to redefine your personal definition of the word "greed".
Click to expand...

I'll stick with the OED definition:

noun
intense and selfish desire for something, especially wealth, power, or food.
Click to expand...

Also, don't tell me what to fucking do. It's my opinion and it happens to align nicely with the real meaning of the word. Unlike some people I actually work to achieve a goal to better mankind, not to roll around in money. Seriously, you piss me the fuck off telling me how to think, and it is uncalled for.

I'm going to go back to using my computer, electricity, etc. to support folding, spending my own money to help others, and donating to charity. Greed is evil and unethical.
 
It's just sad that Google couldn't come up with a product on its own without stealing technologies from other companies to make an operating system. Companies selling Android devices should rightfully have to pay for using technology they didn't take care to license in the first place (or at least exercise due dilligence in finding out if their supplier, Google, wasn't up to its usual questionable business practices).
 
If we're gonna talk about greed....


"Well first of all, tell me: Is there some society you know that doesn’t run on greed? You think Russia doesn’t run on greed? You think China doesn’t run on greed? What is greed? Of course, none of us are greedy, it’s only the other fellow who’s greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system.”

Milton Friedman said it best!
 
zaxour said:
If we're gonna talk about greed....


"Well first of all, tell me: Is there some society you know that doesn’t run on greed? You think Russia doesn’t run on greed? You think China doesn’t run on greed? What is greed? Of course, none of us are greedy, it’s only the other fellow who’s greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system.”

Milton Friedman said it best!
Click to expand...

Having the desire to innovate to put food on your table and support your family, friends, community, and own ideals is fine. It's when shit like buying other peoples' ideas to stifle that same innovation for globs of money solely for yourself, that it becomes greed. Never said I was anti money or capitalism. I'm actually quite pro-free market (of tangible goods and services). I find the current patent thing, anti-consumer and anti-innovation, thus slowing down the market and channeling money towards lawyers and people who never thought up an idea on their own.
 
EndlessRed said:
Did MS ever specify which patents they hold that is actually forcing all the Android manufacturers to cough up? I've been wondering about this for quite a while.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's the FAT file system patents.

People need to stop calling those the "Android Patents." They're valid patents that Microsoft was (and still is) a valid practicing entity for. This isn't patent trolling, it's legitimate competitor exclusion, which is exactly what the patent system is for.
 
InorganicMatter said:
I'm pretty sure it's the FAT file system patents.

People need to stop calling those the "Android Patents." They're valid patents that Microsoft was (and still is) a valid practicing entity for. This isn't patent trolling, it's legitimate competitor exclusion, which is exactly what the patent system is for.
Click to expand...

Unless an Android phone has an SD card it doesn't use the FAT file system anymore.
 
There are a lot of patents, they will be under NDA for those that settled. If you want to know google around and you will find them.
 
InorganicMatter said:
I'm pretty sure it's the FAT file system patents.

People need to stop calling those the "Android Patents." They're valid patents that Microsoft was (and still is) a valid practicing entity for. This isn't patent trolling, it's legitimate competitor exclusion, which is exactly what the patent system is for.
Click to expand...

Patents are not a valid concept. They are legalized state-sanctioned robbery.

Microsoft can't compete with Android so they resort to theft instead.
 
damicatz said:
Patents are not a valid concept. They are legalized state-sanctioned robbery.

Microsoft can't compete with Android so they resort to theft instead.
Click to expand...

Of course patents are a valid concept, otherwise people could just copy and reverse engineer any work of others and sell it as their own. In a capitalistic society their has to be some type of patent system, otherwise it would not only be government that one would have to fear confiscating their property, but the welfare class as well who many around here claim are only interested in stealing the wealth of others. How better than to steal it at the source.

As for Microsoft being able to compete against Android, could you compete against someone stealing all of your wealth?
 
damicatz said:
Patents are not a valid concept. They are legalized state-sanctioned robbery.

Microsoft can't compete with Android so they resort to theft instead.
Click to expand...

They're not state-sanctioned robbery, they're a state-sanctioned monopoly. Big difference.

Also worth mentioning that it's a monopoly that's only temporary, requires fully disclose the details of your invention to get, and requires compliance with a bunch of requirements to get and keep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top