EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.09.10

Eye on Microsoft: Signs of Game Over

Posted in Antitrust, Bill Gates, Courtroom, Deception, Microsoft, Security, Windows at 12:42 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The press seems pessimistic about Microsoft, which is increasingly seen as unable to evolve and innovate; Microsoft’s security problems (and security PR) persist in a major way

THIS VERY large post contains a lot of details (and new references) about the weaknesses of Microsoft and the endless spin it continues to rely on. We begin with this article from a former Microsoft chief who publicly blasted the company’s technical capabilities. We wrote about this in a previous post that complained about the way he rewrote history when he called Microsoft a “largely accidental monopolist.” From The Source we have this response:

Other stuff: Playing Monopoly

It’s interesting that the official Microsoft Blog didn’t address some of the other interesting claims from Mr. Brass.

Take for example his assertion that Microsoft is “at worst” a “highly repentant, largely accidental monopolist”. Largely accidental? First off, I question the idea that a company can “accidentally” stumble into monopolizing an industry. Secondly, we have reams of documentation (like Comes v. Microsoft) that show Microsoft at all levels is deadly serious about eliminating competition, regardless of the means.

Even if you accept “highly repentant” – which I emphatically do not – Microsoft certainly did not become a monopoly largely by accident.

Other Stuff: Sustaining Economy

Another interesting assertion by Mr. Brass is that Microsoft “helps sustain the economies of Seattle, Washington State and the nation as a whole.”

Perhaps Mr. Brass is not aware of the $1 Billion Microsoft Tax Dodge? Or the over $650 Million in tax breaks Microsoft recieves? That’s just at the state level.

Well, since the tax dodge was brought up, Jeff Reifman’s writings about Microsoft’s massive tax dodge [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] are worth commending. It seems to have had an impact in the sense that the Seattle Weekly has just placed the issue at a highly visible part of the paper. It says:

As our cash-strapped state prepares to cut services for the poor and mentally ill, billions of dollars in tax breaks and exemptions are still being doled out.

[...]

Deferral of state and local retail sales and use taxes are also allowed for the construction of buildings for high-tech projects involving research and development. That has Microsoft and its ever-expanding campus written all over it, allowing MS to avoid sales tax on construction costs, materials, and new equipment, for example. Another 500 small and large companies also benefit, says the state. The exemption was created in 1994 and extended in 2004 for another 10 years. Over a decade, that’s $650 million the state is not raking in.

Almost 1,700 high-tech firms also share another $50 million in B&O tax credits for research and development under an exemption that was also renewed in 2004 for another decade. And a $12 million property-tax break goes to companies that use custom computer software.

Microsoft, incidentally, has also avoided paying a ton of state taxes by moving offshore, so to speak. According to writer and ex-Microsoftie Jeff Reifman, Microsoft opened a small Nevada office in 1997 to record software-licensing revenue and skirt Washington’s half-percent wholesale tax on software-licensing royalties. Reifman estimates that has helped the company of billionaires Bill Gates and Paul Allen avoid more than $700 million in Washington taxes. With interest and penalties, the total exceeds $1 billion.

There is also this open letter to Steve Ballmer. It protests against his tax evasion in the Seattle Weekly.

Microsoft Nick (from Ziff Davis [1, 2, 3], not the Seattle P-I) has responded to the article from Mr. Brass in eWEEK (“Microsoft Suffers from Creative Difficulties, Says Former Exec”) and in Microsoft Watch (“Microsoft Failing in Innovation, Former Executive Asserts”). Joe Wilcox, who used to edit Microsoft Watch, does a series called “Microsoft Confessions” in which he shows how rotten things have become inside the company. “Microsoft Confessions: ‘Deeply dysfunctional family’” was one part of it, but another one, “Microsoft Confessions: ‘Killed over politics’,” says that one confession goes like this: “When Bill Gates first started the ‘aggressive schedule’ mantra to get people to work harder, [it was] tell folks we only had 2 months left, when we knew it was six. How could I as a manager look my people in the face and seriously tell them we’re two months from shipping — work your ass off — knowing the bug count was high, the find rate was high and undercover dev work was still being completed?

“I finally had enough when my last reorg had me put under a brand new manager, with less weeks experience than I had years doing his job, telling me I wasn’t doing my job properly. I asked him how many products he shipped. A couple was the answer. Meanwhile, I had three full Lucite blocks packed with ship-it awards on my desk. At that point, I gave my notice.

“How many [Microsoft] reorgs have ever benefited anyone except the folks on top? In all my reorgs, I only ever had one that actually benefited the troops; and that was a super good manager that said if you take me, you take my team. He was one of the best I’d ever worked for — and, of course, he is no longer at MS either. To me, that speaks volumes.”

One last part, titled “Microsoft Confessions: ‘Poor worker bees,’” goes like this: “My former team required 60-90+ hours a week of its employees for several years straight. The average across many weeks was 80-90 [hours], for months on end. If you were unwilling to do the hours any more, you became persona non grata. This meant the least desirable assignments, poor reviews and so on. While the conventional answer to a bad team situation in a big company is to transfer teams, it didn’t work for people on that team.”

It’s all rather revealing, isn’t it? Microsoft is crumbling from the inside because it mistreats employees and brings many from other countries to compete with those who adhere to workers’ rights. Other responses to the article from Mr. Brass are:

The Instability of Monopolies

Weekly high-tech hot topics in the blogs: Microsoft’s creative destruction, Nexus One

Sack Ballmer? Break Up the Company? How Microsoft Could Innovate

Global CIO: Microsoft’s Suicidal Infighting: An Insider’s Story

Late last year, I wrote about how Microsoft had lost its will to lead and had become a big but passive follower and imitator whose competitors regard it this way:

“They see Microsoft as drifting toward fat and complacent, prone to bold talk but tepid action, and increasingly satisfied with being a not-so-fast follower instead of the brash and aggressive embracer of high-risk strategies and approaches that enabled Microsoft to dominate markets by sheer dint of its unmatched will and its sometimes-brutal assault on any and all obstacles between it and the top spot.”

Has Microsoft become clumsy, dysfunctional and uncreative?

Bill Gates is no longer a day-to-day force at Microsoft Corp., but you have to wonder what he makes of the smackdown delivered by a former Microsoft vice president in the New York Times.

Former VP Says Microsoft is ‘Failing’ Despite Windows 7 Profits

Executive blames lack of creativity for the supposed problems at Microsoft, points to RIM, Apple, and Amazon as innovators

How the mighty fall

A sensational piece in today’s New York Times by Dick Brass, former vice president at Microsoft between 1997 and 2004, on the continuing struggles at the software giant. Mr Brass worked on the company’s unsuccessful attempts to develop popular tablet PCs and e-books. You might think he is writing out of bitterness and disappointment. But he offers a measured (and fascinating) commentary on the difficulty big, successful companies have in changing to adapt to new times.

Microsoft responded and IDG has covered this response. “Microsoft flings chairs at former VP,” is how The Inquirer chose to put it:

SOFTWARE MONOLITH Microsoft is fuming after a blog post penned by a former vice president claimed the outfit had lost its edge and is “failing” as a result.

As this new article reminds us, Microsoft is not innovative and competitors have said that for a long time. Oracle’s Larry Ellison, for example, has memorable quotes.

Here’s some quotes from him about Microsoft: “If an innovative piece of software comes along, Microsoft copies it and makes it part of Windows. This is not innovation. This is the end of innovation”. And “Microsoft is already the most powerful company on earth, but you ain’t seen nothing yet.”

Going back to the “largely accidental monopolist” remark, here is what Groklaw had to say about it, preceding it with the example of history being rewritten by the BBC:

I had no idea when we began working on this project that the Comes exhibits covered such a broad time period, so far from 1988 to 2003. I woke up this morning thinking about the BBC’s truly offensive series on innovation and the internet, which you can only view in the UK, in which Bill Gates of all people is one of those highlighted as an internet innovator, if you can believe it. Maybe because ex-Microsoft employees seem to be running things there? Having just transcribed several emails that prove that Microsoft was perhaps the very last to hop on board, I realized that with this collection of exhibits, we are indeed publishing The True History of Microsoft. Please feel free to help out. You can either transcribe any exhibit in full, in part or just describe it enough so it’s keyword searchable. Come on and join us if you’d like to help historians in the future know how it really was and what really happened, keeping always in mind that this is still only part of a complex picture, despite their great historical value.

Here’s Microsoft Corporate’s response to the NY Times Op Ed piece, to be complete in our coverage, and fair, but also so you can compare it and Brass’s words with what you find in the exhibits. I think you will agree with my opinion, that Brass’s characterization of Microsoft as “a largely accidental monopolist” is hardly accurate.

A few days earlier, Jones wrote: “I think if you read through the exhibits we are publishing from the Comes v. Microsoft antitrust litigation, you will see that it was hardly accidental.”

Groklaw also gives the text of the “we were smoked” memo (exhibit PX07219 (2003) [PDF] from Comes vs Microsoft), which we are appending at the bottom. We previously wrote about Microsoft’s fear of Apple and Bill Gates wanting to maximise “patented stuff”. That was another memo which was similar.

As for the BBC, on it goes with the same shameful agenda. Part 2 of “The Virtual Revolution” is out right about now (available for viewing only in the UK) and our reader who has already watched it gives the following errata:

(9:50) she trots out that old chestnut, that the the Internet was designed to defend against nuclear missiles. At least that’s what is implied with the visuals.

At (51:38) she mentions DOS attacks against Estonia, absolutely no mention that they are caused by a vast army of compromised Windows ‘computers’.

I’ll watch this show later tonight and hopefully add more to the above.

This reader of ours has noticed that Microsoft uses yet another publicity stunt with kids in it. It is “Paying dividends in good publicity already,” says our reader. “Of course the kiddies will be attracted to the filth, like moths to a flame…

“Microsoft exploits parental fears to push Internet Explorer 8,” he later added, linking to this post from Microsoft Jack [1, 2, 3]. “Personally,” he argues sarcastically, “if you mention something to a kid and tell them not to do it, then they’ll want to do it…”

Our reader ThistleWeb points to Rory Cellan-Jones from the BBC, calling it “More MSBBC PR”. Rory’s headline is “Government advice: Browse safely with Microsoft”

He is not joking, but he asks ORG for a response at least:

But open-source campaigners are concerned that Ceop has been just a little too eager to promote the Microsoft solution.

“Microsoft have scored a publicity hit for a little cost,” Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group told me. “It’s important that Ceop doesn’t persuade people to use a single browser, particularly one which has had a history of security lapses causing other threats to home users.”

Microsoft has a good record in helping to promote safe internet use in schools and homes – and Ceop is working hard to educate parents and children about internet safety.

That last sentence says it all about Rory’s consistent denial of the company’s incompetence, never mind the many crimes (with convictions). The BBC is deep in Microsoft’s pocket because former Microsoft employees are running the show [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. We’ll come back to security in just a moment.

Many people will not have the time to read Comes vs Microsoft exhibits for themselves, but they ought to trust the judgment of those who did go through the documents. Groklaw complains about a silly, misinformed, and biased article from Randall Kennedy (IDG). Pamela Jones writes: “My vote for funniest column of the day goes to this article. The author thinks Microsoft brings standards to the world, and so a world without Microsoft would be so innovative, it would be chaotic without Microsoft’s steady hand making us all follow standards. Because I’ve spent the last couple of weeks transcribing and describing the exhibits from the Comes v. Microsoft antitrust case, I confess I found his “vision” of a Windows-less world simply hilarious. But for any who might take it seriously, it is Microsoft who has a history of “extending” standards in its own proprietary ways, not Open Source. And it was Opera who just pointed out to the EU Commission Microsoft’s refusal to follow HTML standards. The Commission got Microsoft promise to improve, but Kennedy’s vision of Microsoft somehow making the world follow standards… well, it’s priceless. Is he Rob Enderle’s son or something?”

To be fair, he has always been focused on Windows everything. Linux Insider (ECT) gives a ride to that piece of FUD.

One reader sent us a pointer to this article, noting that “Th[is] letter from 2003 sheds some light on how long that Microsofters have been aware of the scam perpetuated there.

“Stuz had lots of good quotes:”

A retiring Microsoft executive delivered a kick in the pants to his former employer, warning in a version of his resignation letter that he posted to the Internet that Microsoft is in danger of being swept away by open source.

Microsoft faces the same embrace-or-be-destroyed alternatives with open source that it faced with the Internet years ago, David Stutz said, Microsoft’s group program manager for the Shared Source Common Language Initiative until his recent retirement.

Our reader then commented on Microsoft’s corporate culture:

Yes, the work culture there has always sucked. It’s not a new thing. The management has always sucked, that’s not new either. The employees have always sucked, too. Between them and the management,that’s why nothing works or is completed on time.

What is new is that individuals go strange. Matt Asay probably went Microsoft quite a long while ago. It’s not uncommon for Windows trolls to use OS X. He’s probably not a Windows troll, maybe just an apologist. Whatever.

I find his amnesia regarding Microsoft unconvincing, to say the least. Didn’t the same strangeness turn up in Patrick Durusau, too? He did a 180 on Microsoft after a ‘meeting’ with some representatives:

http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/03/contra-du…
http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/06/the-weed…
http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/06/a-memo…

What’d they do to him? money? threats? abuse? chemicals? blackmail?

Matt Asay almost went to work for Microsoft a few years ago, but very few people do understand this. Either way, his new role at Canonical [1, 2] will hopefully not shock. As for Patrick Durusau, we wrote about the subject in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. There was a lot of money at stake.

Microsoft had lost over $5,000,000,000 just trying to dethrone Google (in vain) and Microsoft’s latest poor results (which Microsoft scrambled in order to confuse people [1, 2, 3, 4]) showed that the losses online continue. “Admit It, Microsoft: You Suck at the Web,” says GigaOM (not Malik himself, as he is the one who received money from Microsoft). The rant says:

And what does it have to show for all its effort? Years of losses. Since 2002, when Microsoft began breaking out MSN and online services as a separate category, the division has seen aggregate revenue of $20 billion but a total operating loss of nearly $7 billion. In the past 18 months, the losses in proportion to revenue have only grown larger. Microsoft now spends nearly two dollars on its online businesses for every dollar it makes in revenue. Major points for trying, but it’s time to call a failure a failure.

Another insight: “Why Microsoft Can’t Grow– And Why Its Shareholders Deserve More Cash”

There is no shame in Microsoft coming to the realization that they have one and a half valuable properties and that they are wasting time and money on everything else (see chart below).

This takes us back to the subject of security, on which the BBC are others are currently deceiving by advertising Microsoft. One of our readers complained about the following analysis which neglects to blame Windows botnets as the cause.

Covering the last six months of 2009, the report is based upon the findings of the ThreatSeeker Network which is used to discover, classify and monitor global Internet threats and trends courtesy of something called the Internet HoneyGrid. This comprises of honeyclients and honeypots, reputation systems and advanced grid computing systems, all of which combine to parse through one billion pieces of content every day while searching for security threats. Every single hour the Internet HoneyGrid scans some 40 million websites for malicious code as well as 10 million emails for unwanted content and malicious code.

How about Microsoft's role? It neglected to patch its browser for almost half a year and Internet Explorer users paid the price [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]. Shortly after the “emergency” patch, yet another flaw came to the surface, followed by another:

Microsoft’s Internet Explorer could inadvertently allow a hacker to read files on a person’s computer, another problem for the company just days after a serious vulnerability received an emergency patch.

Microsoft’s Internet Explorer was subsequently subjected to backlash and in recent days we have found news reports, such as:

Microsoft warns that IE zero-day vulnerability causes data leakage

Microsoft issued a new advisory late Wednesday, warning Internet Explorer (IE) users of the potential for data leakage as a result of new publicly disclosed IE zero-day vulnerabilities.

Microsoft were aware of Aurora security flaws

In a blog posting by Jerry Bryant, a Microsoft security programme manager, “when the attack discussed in Security Advisory 979352 was first brought to our attention on Jan 11, we quickly released an advisory for customers three days later.”

“As part of that investigation, we also determined that the vulnerability was the same as a vulnerability responsibly reported to us and confirmed in early September.”

Has Microsoft shot itself in the foot with Security Essentials?”

Expert finds vulnerabilities in Microsoft browser

Microsoft probing new hole in IE security

The newer problem is covered in:

Internet Explorer Bug Can Disclose Local Files

New attack against IE could expose all PC files

Microsoft’s popular Internet Explorer web browser suffers from several minor flaws, which, when combined, can allow an attacker to read all the files on a user’s computer, according to researchers at penetration testing vendor Core Security Technologies.

A lot of patches are coming today (we wrote about it here).

Microsoft slates colossal Windows patch next week

Unlucky 13 Microsoft Patches Due Next Week

Microsoft Patches Coming Tuesday: Brace Yourself

And a system restart will be required for these Windows patches, which will mean down time for servers. In fact, 10 of the record-tying 13 bulletins require a restart.

How about this: “Microsoft to patch 17 year old bug”

Like many teens, the 17 year old bug does not do much other than lounge around the hard drive unable to speak. It only exists because the Vole wanted users to be able to run ancient programs on newer machines and had an insecure app to do it.

Having first appeared in Windows NT 3.1, the vulnerability has been carried over into almost every version of Windows that has appeared ever since.

Despite the obvious problems, Microsoft still treats itself as though it’s an authority in security (there is a press release even) and sticking its nose in Super Bowl security (probably for some publicity). This company is preaching about safety while being utterly negligent by choice [1, 2, 3].

With fake cures and despair, fingers keep being pointed in the wrong direction. Microsoft has a serious design issue that cannot be fixed with patches. For instance, there are no repositories in Windows, so the users rely on a poor system/framework of trust. No wonder this type of stuff still appears in the news:

Fake Microsoft Outlook Update Installs Trojan

A malicious spam campaign caught by Panda Labs is using a fake Microsoft Update notice to trick victims into installing a Trojan. While well crafted, the attack still provides dead giveaways.

Will Microsoft ever abandon Windows and build something atop another platform? It has probably run out of time by now. As Jim Allchin put it 7 years ago (see E-mail below), Microsoft was “smoked”. Back then Microsoft still had some savings in the bank, but now it's just borrowing money.


Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit PX07219, as text (not complete text, see original)


—– Original Message —–
From: Bill Gates
Sent: Wed 4/30/2003 10:46 PM
To: Amir Majidimehr; Dave Fester
Cc: Will Poole; Christopher Payne; Yusuf Mehdi; David Cole; Hank Vigil
Subject: Apple’s Jobs again.., and time to have a great Windows download service…

Steve Jobs ability to focus in on a few things that count, get people who get user interface right and market things as revolutionary are amazing things.

This time somehow he has applied his talents in getting a better Licensing deal than anyone else has gotten for music.

This is very strange to me. The music companies own operations offer a service that is truly unfriendly to the user and has been reviewed that way consistently.

Somehow they decide to give Apple the ability to do something pretty good.

I remember discussing EMusic and us saying that model was better than subscription because you would know what you are getting.

With the subscription who can promise you that the cool new stuff you want (or old stuff) will be there?

I am not saying this strangeness means we messed up – at least if we did so did Real and Pressplay and Musicnet and basically everyone else.

Now that Jobs has done it we need to move fast to get something where the UI and Rights are as good.

I am not sure whether we should do this through one of these JVs or not. I am not sure what the problems are.

However I think we need some plan to prove that even though Jobs has us a bit flat footed again we move quick and both match and do stuff better.

I’m sure people have a lot of thoughts on this. If the plan is clear no meeting is needed. I want to make sure we are coordinated between Windows DMD, MSN and other groups.

…. Original Message ….
From: Jim Allchin
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 4:58 PM
To: Amir Majidimehr; Chris Jones (WINDOWS); Will Poole; David Cole
Subject: Apple’s music store

1. How did they get the music companies to go along?

2. We were smoked.

jim

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

3 Comments

  1. Needs Sunlight said,

    February 10, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    Gravatar

    Microsoft Outlook is a security hole masquerading as a useful application. Prior to its arrival it was not possible to spread malware via mail.

    It’s not called LookOut! by accident.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    It has many other derogatory names.

    Thunderbird 3 is out and 3.1 is already in alpha.

  2. uberVU - social comments said,

    February 11, 2010 at 8:46 am

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by schestowitz: The press seems pessimistic about #Microsoft , which is increasingly seen as unable to evolve and innovate http://ur1.ca/lwqn

What Else is New


  1. Links 19/1/2018: Linux Journalism Fund, Grsecurity is SLAPPing Again

    Links for the day



  2. The EPO Ignores This Week's Decision Which Demonstrates Patent Scope Gone Awry; Software Patents Brought Up Again

    The worrisome growth of European Patents (EPs) — a 40% jump in one year in spite of decline in the number of patent applications — is a symptom of the poor judgment, induced largely by bad policies that impede examiners’ activities for the sake of so-called ‘production’; this week's decision regarding CRISPR is another wake-up call and software patents too need to be abolished (as a whole), in lieu with the European Patent Convention (EPC)



  3. WesternGeco v ION Geophysical (at the US Supreme Court) Won't Affect Patent Scope

    As WesternGeco v ION Geophysical is the main if not sole ‘major’ patent case that the US Supreme Court will deal with, it seems safe to say that nothing substantial will change for patent scope in the United States this year



  4. Links 18/1/2018: MenuLibre 2.1.4, Git 2.16 Released

    Links for the day



  5. Microsoft, Masking/Hiding Itself Behind Patent Trolls, is Still Engaging in Patent Extortion

    A review of Microsoft's ugly tactics, which involve coercion and extortion (for businesses to move to Azure and/or for OEMs to preload Microsoft software) while Microsoft-connected patent trolls help hide the "enforcement" element in this whole racket



  6. Patent Prosecution Highway: Low-Quality Patents for High-Frequency Patent Aggressors

    The EPO's race to the bottom of patent quality, combined with a "need for speed", is a recipe for disaster (except for litigation firms, patent bullies, and patent trolls)



  7. Press Coverage About the EPO Board Revoking Broad's CRISPR Patent

    Even though there's some decent coverage about yesterday's decision (e.g. from The Scientist), the patent microcosm googlebombs the news with stuff that serves to distract from or distort the outcome



  8. Links 17/1/2018: HHVM 3.24, WordPress 4.9.2

    Links for the day



  9. No Patents on Life (CRISPR), Said EPO Boards of Appeal Just a Few Hours Ago

    Broad spectacularly loses its key case, which may soon mean that any other patents on CRISPR too will be considered invalid



  10. Only Two Weeks on the Job, Judge Patrick Corcoran is Already Being Threatened by EPO Management

    The attack on a technical judge who is accused of relaying information many people had already relayed anyway (it was gossip at the whole Organisation for years) carries on as he is again being pushed around, just as many people predicted



  11. EPO Board of Appeal Has an Opportunity to Stop Controversial Patents on Life

    Patent maximalism at the EPO can be pushed aback slightly if the European appeal board decides to curtail CRISPR patents in a matter of days



  12. Links 16/1/2018: More on Barcelona, OSI at 20

    Links for the day



  13. 2018 Will be an Even Worse Year for Software Patents Because the US Supreme Court Shields Alice

    The latest picks (reviewed cases) of the Supreme Court of the United States signal another year with little or no hope for the software patents lobby; PTAB too is expected to endure after a record-breaking year, in which it invalidated a lot of software patents that had been erroneously granted



  14. Patent Trolls (Euphemised as “Public IP Companies”) Are Dying in the United States, But the Trouble Isn't Over

    The demise of various types of patent trolls, including publicly-traded trolls, is good news; but we take stock of the latest developments in order to better assess the remaining threat



  15. EPO Management and Team UPC Carry on Lying About Unified Patent Court, Sinking to New Lows in the Process

    At a loss for words over the loss of the Unitary Patent, Team UPC and Team Battistelli now blatantly lie and even get together with professional liars such as Watchtroll



  16. China Tightens Its Knot of Restrictive Rules and Patents

    Overzealous patent aggressors and patent trolls in China, in addition to an explosion in low-quality patents, may simply discourage companies from doing production/manufacturing there



  17. Microsoft's Patent Racket Has Just Been Broadened to Threaten GNU/Linux Users Who Don't Pay Microsoft 'Rents'

    Microsoft revisits its aggressive patent strategy which it failed to properly implement 12 years ago with Novell; it wants to 'collect' a patent tax on GNU/Linux and it uses patent trolls to make that easier



  18. EPO Scandals Played a Considerable Role in Sinking the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    Today's press coverage about the UPC reinforces the idea that the EPO saga, culminating in despicable attacks on Patrick Corcoran (a judge), may doom the UPC once and for all (unless one believes Team UPC)



  19. J Nicholas Gross Thinks Professors Stop Being Professors If They're Not Patent Extremists Like Him

    The below-the-belt tactics of patent trolls and their allies show no signs of abatement and their tone reveals growing irritation and frustration (inability to sue and extort companies as easily as they used to)



  20. The US Supreme Court Has Just Denied Another Chance to Deal With a Case Similar to Alice (Potentially Impacting § 101)

    There is no sign that software patents will be rendered worthwhile any time in the near future, but proponents of software patents don't give up



  21. Litigation Roundup: Nintendo, TiVo, Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Philips, UMC

    The latest high-profile legal battles, spanning a growing number of nations and increasingly representing a political shift as well



  22. Roundup of Patent News From Canada, South America and Australia

    A few bits and pieces of news from around the world, serving to highlight patent trends in parts of the world where the patent offices haven't much international clout/impact



  23. Links 15/1/2018: Linux 4.15 RC8, Wine 3.0 RC6

    Links for the day



  24. PTAB is Being Demeaned, But Only by the Very Entities One Ought to Expect (Because They Hate Patent Justice/Quality)

    The latest rants/scorn against PTAB -- leaning on cases such as Wi-Fi One v Broadcom or entities like Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Apple etc. -- are all coming from firms and people who profit from low-quality patents



  25. If Ericsson and Its Patent Trolls (Like Avanci and Unwired Planet) Cannot Make It, the Patent Microcosm Will Perish

    The demise of patent-asserting/patent assertion business models (trolling or enforcement by proxy) may see front groups/media supportive of it diminishing as well; this appears to be happening already



  26. European Patent Office Causes Physical Harm to Employees, Then Fires Them

    Another one (among many) EPO documents about the alarming physical wellbeing of EPO employees and the management’s attitude towards the issue



  27. Battistelli Was Always (Right From the Start and Since Candidacy) All About Money

    “I have always admired creative people, inventors, those who, through their passion and their work, bring about scientific progress or artistic evolution. I was not blessed with such talent myself,” explained the EPO‘s President when pursuing his current job (for which he was barely qualified and probably not eligible because of his political work)



  28. “Under the Intergovernmental EPC System It is Difficult to Speak of a Functional Separation of Powers”

    An illustration of the glaring deficiency that now prevails and cannot be tolerated as long as the goal is to ensure democratic functionality; absence of the role of Separation of Powers (or Rule of Law) at the EPO is evident now that Battistelli not only controls the Council (using EPO budget) but also blatantly attacks the independence of the Boards of Appeal



  29. The Patent Microcosm Thinks It's Wonderful That IP3 is Selling Stupid Patents, Ignores Far More Important News

    IP3, which we've always considered to be nothing but a parasite, does what it does best and those who love stupid patents consider it to be some sort of victory



  30. Automotives, Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things and Industry 4.0 Among the Buzz Terms Used to Bypass Alice and the EPC Nowadays

    In order to make prior art search a lot harder and in order to make software patents look legitimate (even in various courtrooms) the patent microcosm and greedy patent offices embrace buzzwords


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts