Microsoft and Motorola's Briefs on RAND and Fair Dealing ~pj

There are a couple of filings in the Seattle Microsoft v. Motorola case to tell you about. And I will, plus I have them done as text for you.

There was a teleconference early in June, on the 5th, and the presiding judge, the Hon. James L. Robart, asked the parties to file briefs with the court "to provide an overview of what is required by the duty of good faith and fair dealing in the context of RAND licensing". So I'll show you their arguments:

• Microsoft's [PDF]
• Motorola's [PDF]

So far, as far as I'm concerned, this litigation has been fought on a slanted playing field, whether consciously or not on the judge's part, where everything has ended up tilting Microsoft's way. I think Motorola's lawyers think so too, because they went to a lot more effort than did Microsoft's lawyers, as I'll show you.

Just to give you a taste, Microsoft's filing has no Table of Authorities. Instead it opens with reminding this judge that he's already ruled in a way that favors Microsoft's interpretation of good faith and fair dealing. Motorola lists 3 and a half pages of cases, including the recent ITC ruling granting Samsung an exclusion order against Apple on a RAND patent of Samsung's. That's a polite way of letting a judge know he's out of step when he ruled you can't get an injunction with a RAND patent.