GPS,
Microsoft and TomTom settle Linux patent suit, Linux not necessarily in the clear
By Nilay Patel 
posted Mar 30th 2009 4:56PM
posted Mar 30th 2009 4:56PM
Well, that was fast -- just a month after Microsoft set the open-source world on fire by claiming that TomTom's use of Linux violated its FAT filesystem patents, the two companies have settled, with TomTom paying the always-popular "undisclosed amount" and letting MS license four of its navigation patents for free. What's more, TomTom has also agreed to remove certain functionality from its PNDs within two years. That's huge -- not only did TomTom's attorneys calculate that the total cost of this settlement was less than the cost of a trial and a potential loss, the overwhelmingly one-way nature of the deal implies they felt they were holding a bad position. Since we don't know if that was more to do with the navigation patents or the FAT patents, we can't really say what's going to happen next, but Microsoft's made no bones about the fact that it thinks Linux violates all sorts of its IP, and cruising to an easy settlement in a month like this just might encourage its legal department to go digging for gold in troubled economic times. We'll see.
The Microsoft evil strikes back.
If by 'evil' you mean 'defending their property' then sure.
Oh yeah, Tom Tom have to cough up money to MS. MS don't have to pay a bean to Tom Tom.
Wonder who won that one?
Hey, I own the intellectual rights to the phrase 'cough up money' --I'm taking you to court, Mr. Anderson!
if microsoft was a person, then (s)he'd be a big bag of douche.
Microsoft, Apple and Google are Evil? I mean let's be fair here, we have heard of Apple defending their patents and clobering those they threatened and sued, and let's not forget that Google is no saint either.
Does the same apply to Apple who are suing Palm to protect their own IP despite using Palms IP without consent?
@murphy
what would Apple be if MS would be a big bag of douche?
MS bashing aside, this just seems like MS Lawyers were bored.
Some of their suits i understand, they're trying to destroy competition, prevent abuse of their shit, etc .
But this just seems penickity.
Unless MS are looking at entering the GPS market?
@anonymitee
Oh yeah? We'll I'm countersuing you for emotional damage!
Ha!
@Nick
That would make Apple a shit sandwich per South Park.
@Sam, it would if Apple actually were suing Palm, which they're currently not. Only thinly veiled threats, which while a small difference, is still enough of a difference to be 'not.'
What idiot on here said a few weeks ago that M$ never sues people?
I would imagine this is more of a pissing in the EU's backyard sort of thing than anything else. I mean, why else go after TomTom of all companies.
Ahhhh progress
Yay extortion!
Uh, what features? Tom Tom makes, in my not so humble opinion, the best PNDs out there - I don't want to see unique and innovative features wiped out because Microsoft is run by a bunch of spoil sports.
TomTom formula:
FAT32, possibly the most versatile file system for storage.
Linux, allows for a complete design based on TomTom hardware, cheap and easily adapted to fit the need of consumers.
Result:
The ability to easily store and playback files transferred from elsewhere, with a unique interface.
Lawsuit.
Stability. The next firmware update will install minmobile 6.1 on it.
Yeah sue linux, that should be fun since there is no centralized body that owns linux and on top of that the code base is a mutt derived from countless people that most of them did it just did it because they could.
My discussion with Ebuyer support after receiving a Grub error on arrival of my HP mini note:
"Well talk to HP about it"
"But HP say its not their fault"
"Well talk to SUSE"
"But SUSE say its a grub issue not a SUSE issue"
"Well talk to GRUB"
"GRUB IS A BOOTLOADER"
So, logically, if the MS rightst to the FAT filesystem extends to the name and to compatibility, they can now go and sue every storage device maker and vendor, every software manufacturer, etc, who uses or says "FAT filesystem".
The fact that it's become ubiquitous and MS failed to enforce their patents, copyrights, whatever, is often not viewed favorably by courts. Given the statement that, "TomTom's attorneys calculate that the total cost of this settlement was less than the cost of a trial and a potential loss", it sounds like they were aware that MS would use this to bleed them dry with legal fees, regardless of whether they had a case or not. Next MS will be strong-arming software manufacturers to force them to sell to MS for far below market value with the threat of litiginous extortion. Oh wait, they already did that in the 80's & 90's. The more things change....
No because most companies aren't morons and pay the licensing fees so they don't get their asses sued. You can't have something for nothing friend.
It is tomtom's responsibility to check the patents on the technology they use in their product that is true, but on the other hand Microsoft has been aware of tomtom's using of their IP for a looong looong time, and yet they didn't do anything to claim their due, before this lawsuit, so they aren't in their good right either,because it is also their responsibility settle the fee to use their technologies.
"You can't have something for nothing friend."
It's funny that you posted that in a Linux related article.
I've been accused of being a Microsoft hater in the past, but I'm really not. I felt that the whole bundled IE thing, for example, was overblown and that MS should have been left alone over that. However, as time passes I feel that the creative well at Microsoft (which, let's face it, has never been an innovative company) is running dry, and that we can expect Microsoft to try to stifle competitors with tactics like this as opposed to creating, you know, stuff people actually want. I weep for the future.
The "bundle IE thing" was not overblown. MS wasn't merely front loading IE on Windows and giving it away for free, they were INTEGRATING it into the OS, making it damn near impossible to uninstall, and possibly crippling the OS by trying.
I still don't understand what the problem is with integrating IE with the Windows subsystem. Sure there may be security implications but it doesn't prevent the user from installing a custom browser.
Even if IE was/is deep rooted within Windows, I can still browse the Internet with Firefox (and I do). If you don't like the bundled nature of IE, feel free to use any other operating system out there.
So what?
You don't have to use it. Well, you might have to use it to go get say Opera or Firefox. I fail to see how this is a problem. I didn't understand it then and I don't now.
Maybe Alpine and Pioneer should lobby the SEC to sue GM, Ford, et al for anti-competitive behavior because those cars come with stereos, speakers and controls integrated into the steering wheel.
Don't misunderstand, I think a lot of Microsoft software is crap, but I also think the whole IE thing was crap.
"they were INTEGRATING it into the OS, making it damn near impossible to uninstall, and possibly crippling the OS by trying."
And it made Windows better because of it
Windows Help file support became much more robust
And developers like me (and the ppl who made Winamp for example) were able to count on the fact that every PC had IE and were able to use it in their programs.
And it wasn't impossible. Delete one dll file and it's gone.
I'm surprised there aren't any pictures of the Garmin Nuvi this time
Its one thing to defend your patents and IP, its another to swing your bag of money around at smaller companies and see who you can knock into bankruptcy. Patent law is becoming a burden and in its current state is more detrimental to technological growth than it is beneficial.
This isn't about Microsoft vs. TomTom. It's about Microsoft vs Linux. If MS can sue anyone who decides to use Linux in one of their products, this means they can force companies to use Windows-based OS's over Linux, thereby keeping their monopoly.
Who knows? They may go after linux-based Desktops and Notebooks next.
I'm just curious as to what patents there could be on FAT that aren't non-obvious.
files are only legal in windows, duh.
Why not patent quadratic equation and play dog eat dog with it? Stupid idea? Yeah… as stupid as FAT patent mentioned.
No sweat. Just give the defense team the Open Source treatment... 5,000 pro-bono lawyers later, MS shits themselves.
FAT isn't all that complex.
MS's legal team > 5000 pro-bono lawyers. Especially if legally they are in the right.
Actually, If you all really think about it, Microsoft is a very smart company. I'm wondering is this was something on their legal tables that got put on the back burner for a while, or that TomTom made some revisions to their setup that, in effect, partially or totally reverse-engineered the FAT filesystem (security? 2GB file limit?) and MS's casefiles finally got through the system.