Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

HTC Is Paying Microsoft $5 For Every Android Phone

Posted by timothy on from the they've-reached-step-3 dept.

jcarr writes "According to Citi analyst Walter Pritchard, HTC is paying Microsoft $5 for each Android phone it makes. This may be related to a report from last year: MS and HTC sign patent deal. So now we can't even write a free OS?"

10 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. Software Patents. by bbqsrc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Software patents need to be abolished internationally, it's that simple.

    --
    Disagree != mod troll.
    1. Re:Software Patents. by Shikaku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How do you think Larry page & Sergey Brin would have fared against Altavista and the like had their PageRank system not been patent protected?

      Better because of the need to hire less lawyers and less payouts.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google Count how many times the word court appears.

    2. Re:Software Patents. by hawkinspeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you're confusing patents and copyright. They'd still own copyright on the code. Other people would then have been able to write their own implementations which may have been better or worse. It's kind of how the free market is supposed to work.

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    3. Re:Software Patents. by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copyroght protects specific software implementation. Patent protects the way you make your idea work. There is no need for software patents, as they grant far more protection to software-based ideas then other ideas.

      There should always be a right to implement the same idea in a different way legally. Normal patents work this way. Software patents, for some insane reason (read - corruption in US government that allowed creation of software patents), do not.

  2. Re:Don't sign dumb deals by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Precisely. HTC probably decided that it was worth $5 per handset to indemnify themselves from litigation.

    Whether the fee is paid to MSFT or gobbled up by patent lawyers seems like a morally neutral thing. It's not like one group is significantly less sleazy or sucks less scum than the other.

  3. What did Microsoft invent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trouble is HTC are paying Microsoft for inventions Microsoft didn't make. HTC interface is not the crappy Microsoft one, and the underlying OS predates Microsofts entry into the handset market.

    So what exactly is HTC paying Microsoft for?

    Protection money? That's what it comes down to, MS has convinced them that Microsoft can make everyone's life so difficult that HTC can gain an advantage simply by paying the fee.

    But the B&N challenge shows Microsoft has nothing in its patent portfolio but bluster and vague threats covered with NDAs. That's why MS isn't trying to go after Google directly, rather picking off smaller players.

  4. Sad to see giants fall... by w13rdo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft, now relegated to the position of worlds most prestigious patent troll.

  5. And they wonder why I hate MS by JAlexoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And they wonder why I hate MS... These assholes are abusing the faulty US patent system to effectively enable it worldwide. Why are they paying $5 for EVERY phone, even those that are not destined for US market.
    HTC is NOT an American company. The phones are not manufactured in US. I don't live in US. Why does the US patent law apply to me when I buy an HTC Android phone?!?!?!?!?!

  6. Re:Don't sign dumb deals by Shadowmist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Important thing to remember, HTC phones aren't Android phones. They're "Android plus extras, and some of those extras come from Microsoft.

  7. Re:Open source will always be behind by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as we have software patents. Look at the h264/Theora/WebM fiasco.

    The H.264 licensors include global industrial giants like Mitsubishi. Companies that have been researching video technologies since the 1920s. Companies which manufacture damn near every piece of video hardware sold on the planet.

    Google can deliver a slice of the web and the mobile market --- a generous slice, to be sure, but still only a slice. It has no significant presence elsewhere in video. It can't stop or slow development of a codec like HEVC/H.265 which is going to look very good to Netflix and has the potential for strong sales elsewhere.

    The real reason why open source often lags isn't patents or licensing.

    It is experience, organization, money. manpower. resources, markets and marketing,