It is easy to write a sensational headline that does not deliver once one read the article. If you, however, want to learn how to write a sensational headline that befits the article, look no further than TheRegister.
I love this headline about Microsoft signing a patent deal with Samsung over Android. It says it all. The content rocks as well.
What is interesting here is the fact that Motorola Mobility is the only holdout that did not signed a patent deal with Microsoft and choose litigation. The fact that others fall like domino is only to be expected: It is not good business to be embroiled in a long and protracted legal lawsuit when you can pay to let it go away.
As Clark noted, Motorola Mobility is now a Google Company. What this means to me is show down time is near. Everyone, especially those who signed the patent deal with Microsoft specifically for Android, will be watching it closely. I will be surprised if one of the contract requires Microsoft to sue Motorola in reasonable time. However, I will not be surprised if it turn out that there is a clause in the patent agreement that give licensee a discount if for whatever reason, Motorola Mobility signed on the dotted line and pay less than them.
What is for sure is the loser in this litigation will come out with a lot of egg on its face. If it is Google, it completely destroyed Android image as open source. If Microsoft did not win this one, while I am sure the patent deals will withstand it, Microsoft will have to give the other party a lot of favour when it comes to signing the next deal to keep them happy. Not to mention the public humiliation for using trump up charge against Android. This charge, if proven to be trump up, is more serious than ‘Linux is Cancer’.
Referring to Microsoft thinking that cross licensing is the way to go, Clark pointed out that “Demonstrating a firm grasp for self-fulfilling reasoning, Microsoft’s executive duo reckoned a solution to the industry problem of patent litigation is now in sight. That solution is to sign a deal with Microsoft, when it’s Microsoft that is one of those bringing the prosecutions or rattling the sabers. “. On which I would like to add the following two observations: One, if it is truly the way forward, Microsoft should not had trumpeted it as ‘Android needs Microsoft patent’ because it immediately put a huge obstacle for Google to climb over to sign on the dotted line and, two, we still have another 10 ton elephant in the room called Apple which unlike Microsoft, is not interested in cross-licensing deal but is suing others in order to exclude them from the iPhone/iPad market space. In short, cross-licensing is not a solution to the patent nightmare at all.
 As usual, Brian Proffitt’s analysis of the deal is better, way better than mine. I believe he is right when he says Samsung is irked by Google’s for not coming to their defense on Android. However, while it is an important consideration, I do not think this is one of most important consideration when Samsung inked the deal. If I were Samsung, I just want to pay Microsoft to make it go away. I don’t really have the time or effort to go to court to prove it wrong or to counter sue it with patents I own and know they infringed.