Whoops! M$ paid the wrong guys.

[sgtspector]

Anybody care to speculate on the impact this decision might have if any? I always thought the mp3 standard was in the public domain.

[pam123]

They're going to appeal and I actually think they're in the right in this case.

[Mac Medic]

M$ should win this appeal, if they paid Fraunhofer my understanding is thats all thats needed.

[TimPoet]

$1.5 billion is a lot freakin' money. It seems very dangerous to me. Some thing's just not right here.

[pam123]

Something is, indeed, wrong.

Lucent and Bell Labs worked on audio compression technology in the 1990s, but their focus wasn't MP3. Instead, two other patent holders, Fraunhofer Institute and Thomson, promoted the technology to standards bodies, then sold licenses starting in the mid-1990s. It wasn't until well after MP3 had become the compression technology of choice that Lucent started claiming that its patents applied to MP3 software. And the royalties that Alcatel-Lucent sought — about $5.50 per computer — are far above what the market has already established MP3 technology to be worth (Microsoft's MP3 licensing agreement with Thomson cost $16 million, not $1.5 billion).

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...ent-editorials

This is what's called a submarine patent.
But there's more to it :

Microsoft accuses Lucent of deceiving the U.S. Patent & Trademark office by having one of the patents reissued and backdated to 1988, removing it from the scope of the 1989 deal with Fraunhofer.

http://www.eagletribune.com/pubiz/lo...rystory+page=0

The Appeal is going to be interesting.
Remember when Rambus claimed to have patents on 'all' ram technology?

[TimPoet]

Sink the gorram subs.

[chuck4456]

Sort of like mineral rights.

[sgtspector]

I wonder if there will be any effect on users. I cant help wondering how much it will cost us depending who wins.

[pam123]

Originally Posted by sgtspector I wonder if there will be any effect on users. I cant help wondering how much it will cost us depending who wins.

This whole thing kicked off a few years ago when Lucent went after Dell and Gateway. Microsoft stepped in then since it indemnifies both.
There's actually a series of on going patent disputes and while I can't speak on the others, they're about video compression, this one is bogus ( Doesn't mean we won't get stuck with a bill for it though.).