ITC Judge Calls For US Xbox Import Ban

symbolset writes "In the long running dispute between Motorola and Microsoft, Judge David Shaw of the ITC recommended Monday an import ban on Xbox 360 S consoles, as they are found to infringe Motorola's patents (PDF). The judge also ordered Microsoft post a bond of 7 percent of the retail price of all unsold U.S. Xbox inventory. The decision will go to the ITC's board of commissioners, who will either uphold the recommendation or overturn it. 'Microsoft argued that Shaw's exclusion order does not serve the public interest because it would leave consumers of video game consoles with only two options to satisfy their needs: the Sony Playstation and the Nintendo Wii. Shaw rejected that argument, finding that the public interest in enforcing intellectual property rights outweighs any potential economic impact on video game console buyers.'" This follows news last week of Microsoft winning an import ban on Motorola's Android devices.

H.264 Codec

[bobbomo]

My understanding is that the Xbox 360 uses Windows Media Audio 10 Professional for all system and game audio.

If the main issue is the H.264 video codec, why can't they just switch to Microsoft WMV/VC-1 or one of the many open source ones available? Sounds like a simple software system update to me if its just the video apps doing it. If H.264 is used on game discs then MS needs to payup.

Patents: the nuclear weapon of the corporate wars

[CityZen]

I wonder how long this system will remain viable?

Reminds me of a story concerning the game "MULE" (an excellent little multi-player economy-based game set around the building of a new colony). I liked this game a lot and often played against my brothers and friends. We'd play very competitively, each trying to maximize our own profits. Then I met a friend at college and happened to mention this game. She said, "Oh, I love that game too. What was the richest colony you made?" Until she asked, it hadn't occurred to me that you could play the game a different way: cooperatively, in order to achieve the best good for the colony as a whole.

I wonder when humanity will figure that out too.

(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. It's just a note that we tend to focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones. Compete to make the best thing, rather than compete to kill the competition.)

Re:Ridiculous patent system

[icebike]

I think we're seeing some wide cracks in the patent system if a product can be produced right up to EOL before an import ban can be thrown at it.

Looking at it rationally, how could it possibly work any other way?

Given that there are patents, gazillions of them, how can you possibly read thru each and every on to find out if your new product might have run afoul of some clause in some obscure patent, especially when the language of those patents is purposely written to be vague and all inclusive? You would have to spend two years of patent lawyer time researching what it took you two months to breadboard up in the lab.

These things are always going to be discovered after the fact.

While developing your new gizmo, you only look at the obvious competitors. (Some avoid looking at all, due to the risk of idea pollution).

Microsoft does not see Motorola as a competitor in game consoles, so they ignore them. Same for John Deere tractors. No game consoles. Ignore them.

But then they make the mistake of trying to block Motorola phones, and Moto starts digging around in its bag of patents for a club to hit Microsoft with.
Would Moto spend that time and money without the initial provocation? I'm guessing not.

Re:Ridiculous patent system

[interkin3tic]

I think the point mozumder was trying to make is that a lot of basic research is funded by government grants. Corporations are very happy to throw money at a discovery that seems likely to produce more money immediately, but are generally loath to spend money on discoveries that are not directly something they can sell.

An example Carl Sagan brought up is Maxwell's equations on electromagnetic fields. Extremely important to radar, television, cell phones, and a million other major technologies today. His equations are fundamental to trillions and trillions of dollars in profits today. But the equations themselves are just knowledge and wouldn't turn a profit directly. In today's climate, Maxwell would be funded by grants from the government, corporations would be unlikely to fund him.

Re:Ridiculous patent system

[History's Coming To]

The British NHS has been a state-funded venture from the start (although there is currently legislation in place to change this) so the doctors do not gain/lose anything through profit motive, their general motivation to do their job is the Hypocratic oath and general ethical outlook. Suggesting all doctors are driven by profit seems to be a bit insulting to the profession. Hell, even lawyers do pro bono work, and they're the ones I'd classify as "profit driven" if anyone.

Re:Ridiculous patent system

[Ruie]

Keep in mind that Universities, one of the biggest centers of innovation (often government funded), tend to have massive patent portfolios. They license them out to companies and that in turn funds more fundamental research^W^W^W bigger stadium. So if we killed the system completely we would also have to restructure how basic research is done... which would probably be a good, thing.. just pointing out that corporations are not the only ones utilizing this system.

FTFY. Sorry..