News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Lexi2vic

10/21/16 5:30 PM

#105809 RE: Koog #105807

Lol! Then why did Microsoft buy a license?! Right....
icon url

AZresident

10/21/16 5:33 PM

#105812 RE: Koog #105807

SFOR likes to go after three at a time, hoping one sticks

http://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/mpt/2015/may/13-490.pdf
icon url

Gold49er

10/21/16 5:40 PM

#105814 RE: Koog #105807

Would MSFT had Settled if not found in Violation?

No such thing happened. Microsoft settled with a patent troll. The case never made it to court. Strikeforce's patent claims have yet to be tested in a court of law.



Who found them in Violation does not Matter (SFOR)

You don't know the terms of the Argeement settlement with MSFT.

I'm afraid you are wrong, It has been tested in Court with PhoneFactor.

Microsoft allowed it's Shark Bait Little Fish (PhoneFactor) to test the waters for Great Whites, so MSFT the made a deal when Phonefactor was eaten up in Court. Verdict for the Pantiff $9.7 Million from the little fish.

icon url

ShortTornado

10/21/16 7:02 PM

#105840 RE: Koog #105807

WRONG.....A patent troll is a company that buys a lot of patents with no product. SFOR developed the product, patented it and has products currently at all levels..Retail, enterprise, etc. So you are absolutely wrong that SFOR is a patent troll. Look it up.
icon url

brooklyn13

10/21/16 7:09 PM

#105841 RE: Koog #105807

So, why would Microsoft, with its battalion of in-house lawyers settle with a "patent troll"? Maybe they were running late for dinner? Besides being preposterous on the face of it, it would have set a precedent and let the world of patent trolling know that Microsoft folds its cards, quickly. I don't think so.