Thursday, February 22nd 2007

Microsoft Fined $1.5 Billion over MP3 Patent

Microsoft has been ordered to pay $1.5 billion to Alcatel-Lucent after losing a patent dispute regarding the MP3 audio technology used by Windows. The enormous fine comes after a verdict by a federal jury in San Diego ruled that the company should compensate for damages based on each Windows PC sold since May 2003. Microsoft claims that it licensed MP3 technology from Fraunhofer in a $16 million deal, and also claims that the patent may not cover overseas Windows sales, arguing they should be excluded from the damages. Alcatel-Lucent previously sued Dell and Gateway during 2003 in similar cases.Source: CNET
Add your own comment

39 Comments on Microsoft Fined $1.5 Billion over MP3 Patent

#1
Pinchy
Like Vista isnt overpriced as is...
Posted on Reply
#2
mullered07
Pinchy said:
Like Vista isnt overpriced as is...
£65 for oem home premium is a damn good deal if you ask me
Posted on Reply
#3
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
I'm probably the biggest MS hater, but even I think thats a bit cuntish.
Posted on Reply
#4
Pinchy
mullered07 said:
£65 for oem home premium is a damn good deal if you ask me
Its more than that over here :(
Posted on Reply
#6
Scavar
Ex raven that is sweet....well I mean that sucks for the US tresurary, but yeah its sweet.

Still though, it is hard that they should even begin to sue over that, MS suits rarely go well for the people suing MS though. Except for Class Action suits, ive seen MS give into a few of those.
Posted on Reply
#7
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Pinchy said:
Like Vista isnt overpriced as is...
It is the same price as XP, so no complaints here.
Posted on Reply
#8
Jimmy 2004
newtekie1 said:
It is the same price as XP, so no complaints here.
In all fairness, M$ is just about the only company I know that isn't charging way more for an updated piece of software - most companies try to suck even more money out of you by charging more for new software you don't need. Anyway, £65 (perhaps a little higher) is quite a fair price when you consider what Windows actually does... people will happily pay £25 for a game that is going to crash more than Windows and last about 12 months before being replaced, when you can get at least three years out of Windows which does much more than any game.
Posted on Reply
#9
Carcenomy
Very true - it's quite amusing how a friend of mine has bought every Battlefield game that's ever been released refuses to buy Windows because 'it's too expensive'. Like that copy of Battlefield 2142 (that he didn't play anyway because he like Battlefield 2 better) at $100NZ, a copy of XP Pro Upgrade was only $200. It's too late for him now anyway - XP is no longer stocked at stores here, it's all Vista.
Posted on Reply
#10
niko084
Wile E said:
mp3 isn't open source. It's a patented technology. You have to pay licensing fees to use it. That's the reason the ability to play them isn't included in most Linux distros.
That just happened recently that it was patented, and by a company who did not in fact write it, they just have a lot of power and money.
Posted on Reply
#11
Pinchy
Jimmy 2004 said:
In all fairness, M$ is just about the only company I know that isn't charging way more for an updated piece of software - most companies try to suck even more money out of you by charging more for new software you don't need. Anyway, £65 (perhaps a little higher) is quite a fair price when you consider what Windows actually does... people will happily pay £25 for a game that is going to crash more than Windows and last about 12 months before being replaced, when you can get at least three years out of Windows which does much more than any game.
Are you guys talking about an upgrade kit for £65 or the whole OS?

EDIT - :roll: I was looking at Home Premium PACK OF 3, and thats why it was $505 :p:slap:

Holy crap, the single pack is only $197, that is pretty damn sweet :)
Posted on Reply
#12
Scavar
Yeah Vista isn't overpriced in the least, at least not Home Premium, even Ultimate isn't so bad.

And I just today tested my parents copy on my computer. Completely different computer, and it installs. It even registered. So its on my computer, and my parents, and its an OEM...and both registered. So I don't know what jargon was all about it not installing more then once if the parts are different. I did have to call, but it was simple.

Asked me some questions, and then he changed the key to be not OEM I guess. I don't know what he did, but it works fine. I even reinstalled on my parents computer, just because I could.
Posted on Reply
#13
Pinchy
Isnt it illegal to install the same copy of an OS on different computers :p?
Posted on Reply
#14
ex_reven
yep
unless the other computer is a laptop
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment