Slashdot Mirror
Apple Agrees To Pay Licensing Fees To Nokia
dkd903 writes "After almost two years of litigation of Nokia and Apple suing and counter-suing each other, the patent war between the two companies has come to an end. The winner of this settlement is, however, Nokia. As a part of the settlement, Apple has agreed to become a licensee of Nokia's patents. As a part of the licensing agreement, Apple has agreed to give Nokia a one-time payment and ongoing royalties. The exact terms of the agreement have not been disclosed."
I thought Apple was the company doing all the innovation.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Yes. It's never been a question whether Apple needed to license the patents. The sticking point has always been the terms. Normally these licenses involve some sort of cross licensing. I think Apple originally objected to the specific patents that Nokia wanted from them as they felt the patents were not cell phone patents but patents to their other technology. Frankly Apple didn't have a lot of cell phone patents so they didn't have many to offer. So Nokia then raised the licensing cost if they were not getting the patents they wanted. Apple objected to that.
Since we don't know the terms, we can't speculate how it was settled. There are two factors that may come into play. (1) Nokia is in a bit of trouble right now; they need to focus on their business and not a resource draining litigation where in the end only the lawyers may win. (2)Apple bought 200 patents from Freescale (former Motorola semiconductor division). So Apple now has patents to offer in cross licensing.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I wouldn't be so certain: While patent infringement lawsuits tend to drag on and on and on, often with little visible result other than fattening the lawyers and the eventual cross-licencing deal, that doesn't change the fact that the penalties for being on the losing end of one can be... dramatic.
While Nokia has taken a hammering because they can't seem to get a smartphone out the door, they do have a lot of 'basic research' patents on assorted cellular technologies, and I'm just guessing that Apple's balance sheet and shareholders would be a mite peeved if Nokia managed to secure a USITC injunction against the import of Apple's cell-capable products into the US...
If Nokia has even a shred of a case, and it is quite likely that they do, given the amount of GSM/etc. R&D they've done, paying them off is almost certainly the logical path. The fact that life looks grim for Nokia in the long term doesn't change the fact that they could potentially deliver a world of hurt in the short term.
I'm no fan of the Windows Phone, but I've also learned not to write off MS so quickly. Every time they come out with a new product, everyone laughs it off. And sometimes (as with the Zune) that proves to be warranted. But I also remember when the Xbox came out and Sony laughed that off. Then the Xbox 360 became the dominant brand in North America and suddenly Sony wasn't laughing anymore.
You can question the merits of their products, but there is little doubt that MS has a lot of marketing money to through behind a product if they really want too.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I bet Lawyers from both sides are buying each other drinks today. ;)
They had the MeeGo option, which was the real linux on a smartphone rather then a bastardised java VM driving OS in android, which microsoftie boss dropped like a hot cake.
Apple have been fighting all along to pay royalties. Nokia wanted Apple to hand-over some of their patents relating to mobile 'phones but Apple refused.
Apple got what they wanted, not Nokia.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
http://thisismynext.com/2011/06/14/nokia-and-apple-settle-patent-disputes-apple-to-pay-one-time-fee-and-ongoing-license-fees/ This article explains the situation much better.
Since we don't know the terms, we can't speculate how it was settled
Actually, since we don't know the terms, all we can do is speculate.
No one, everybody but Apple was already paying the licensing fee, or was a co-developer of the technology. This is part of the reason why Apple's case has been so weak.
Spread some fud will ya?
Apple got sued because they didn't want to pay the licensing fees *everyone* else are paying.
Android isn't going to be sued by Nokia.
We don't know if Nokia got the patents. All we know is they settled. The announcement does not say either way.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
So Nokia spends billions of R&D helping to develop wireless standards like GSM and you expect them to eat the costs? I'd hardly call that "exploitation" by Nokia.
But Apple has to produce the iPhones, whereas Nokia basically gets money for doing nothing.
I'd say I'd prefer to be Nokia in this situation.
It sounds like a schoolyard grudge:
Here is a brief history of the patent lawsuits between Nokia and Apple.
- In October 2009, Nokia started off the patent war against Apple with a lawsuit claiming that Apple’s iPhone infringes on 10 Nokia patents related to GSM, UMTS and Wi-Fi.
-In December 2009, Apple counter sued Nokia claiming that Nokia infringes on 13 patents owned by Apple.
-Almost two weeks after Apple countersued them, Nokia filed a complaint against Apple in the International Trade Commission. The complaint claims that virtually all of Apple’s devices infringe on one of seven patents owned by Nokia that covers the UI, camera, antenna and power management.
-A few days (January 2010) after the complaint to the ITC, Nokia again went to the ITC and asked that they ban the import of all Apple products – from MacBooks to iPods.
-Two weeks after Nokia asked the ITC to ban all Apple devices, Apple responded in the same vein by asking the ITC to ban import of Nokia devices to the US.
-In May 2010, Nokia again sued Apple saying that the iPhone 3G infringes on five Nokia patents. At this point, Nokia is accusing Apple of infringing on 22 patents and Apple is accusing Nokia of infringing 13 Apple patents.
-In December 2010, Nokia again sues Apple in the UK, Germany and Netherlands claiming that the iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch infringes on 13 Nokia patents which cover issues such as UI, antenna design, messaging etc.
-In March 2011, Nokia again returned to the International Trade Commission to complain against Apple and added seven more patents to the list that they are accusing Apple of infringing. The seven new patents that Nokia is accusing Apple of infringing are related to technologies about multitasking, bluetooth, data synchronization etc.
-Finally in June 2011 (today), Apple has succumbed and has agreed to pay Nokia to license the Nokia patents.
The most important info was left out. The reason this all played out was that Nokia was unwilling to license to Apple on the same RAND terms that they had committed to, and used with everyone else. They wanted access to specific 'touch' patents held by Apple in addition to the usual monetary payments that Apple had always expected to pay.
We now know Apple is paying to access Nokia's patents, but:
Did Apple give access to their iPhone-related patent portfolio in return?
Did Apple pay a premium over RAND terms?
Did Nokia no longer need access to Apple's patents due to indemnity from Microsoft since they are moving to WP7?
I humbly disagree. I am European, and i can say, that although Nokia was never "bad", they didn't always have the "tech" hardware, or software, their price tags warrented.
I have owned, or had access to a huge variaty of phones from 1997, to present, including the Nokia 8110 ( the Matrix phone), 6150, 6210, 8210, Ericsson T68, T610, P800, S700, K800, N95, Moto v3i, and many other brands, including HTC, and Apple.
Take the early days (1995 - 1996) when i first got my mobile phone. Of the "big three", Nokia Ericsson and Motorola. Moto was known for "cheaper" but relatively solid, if basic phones. Nokia's flagship was the 2110, and Ericsson had the EH337. The Ericsson phone was by far better build quality, was more robust, had more "features".
Nokia then brought out the 8110 in 1996 (the same phone that later appeared in the Matrix) and that phone pushed Nokia into the market due to its style, and "number of ringtones". However, the phone was not as well built as Ericsson, and arguably lacked many key features (keyguard, clock, etc). the Phone was a marketting success for Nokia, not nessesarily a tech one. I had one myself.
After that, Nokia improved their platform, starting with the 6110, the 2110, which launched the infamous "nokia ui" together with the prorietry Ringtones/Logos, etc. The current Series 40 is an evolution from that. Right up until 2001 with the release of Ericsson T68, Nokia had the UI experience that beat other manufacturers.
Their tech may have not always been the most advanced: indeed Others had POP email, Bluetooth, open ringtones/picture support. Nokia's first bluetooth implementations were a joke, with phones being shipped with bluetooth on and discoverable as standard, resulting in those Nokia users being easy pickings for BlueJacking. Even today, Nokias implementation of Bluetooth although a lot better than android/iphone/ and most others, are still not as good as most comparable Sony Ericsson feature phones, still not supporting multi connections. Their email support still doesnt support IMAP idle in a sane way (Sony ericssons have been supporting that since the K800i)
However the Nokia UI, and propritry customisations drove the market. The problem for nokia came when they originally released the Series 60, they wanted to emulate the Original Nokia UI as much as possible. It was argued that UIQ by Symbian was a better implementation, which would have been more "touch friendly" from the go, as it was already a pen interface.
This was what caused the huge legacy problems in the future. When I got my Nokia N95, although i was really impressed by the hardware, the tech was amazing, the software was really confusing, and long in the tooth. For example:
- Nokia still has the same T9 implementation it had on earlier phones, whereas other manufactureres have improved the technology incredibly.
- 3 different places to set varies WiFi parameters (grrr)
- disjointed settings, lack of clarity.
This was the reason Nokia messed up. IT wasnt as much that the Apple iphone touch interface was soo "good", whcih admittedly it was, it was more the case that Series 60 became so "bad", and apple just polished up.
Have a nice day!
Since when? They've been buidling hardware for >30 years and have thousands of hardware patents.
The whole case was that Nokia insisted on unfettered access to Apple's intellectual property as a condition of Apple implementing a global standard (which was supposed to be offered under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms).
http://seekingalpha.com/article/177955-apple-launches-countersuit-vs-nokia-no-punches-pulled-in-court-documents
Which of these statements is false?:
1. GSM is a global standard.
2. Nokia agreed to F/RAND standards for licensing all patents required to implement GSM as a condition of making it a global standard
3. Nokia was insisting on disproportionate value from Apple (compared to other licensees) in exchange for the licenses to implement GSM. They wanted either far more money than they were charging other licensees, or unfettered access to Apple's intellectual property (not part of any standard) on a hundred billion dollar business.
So, who is the bully and who is the victim here?
"Fanboi" is a compound word, with one part based on the word "fanatic". It's quite clear that "anti-Apple fanatic" sums up your posts here quite well.
And, since you are so eager to use the term yourself, anti-Apple fanboi.
You are essentially correct, but apple refused to join the GSMA even AFTER they decided to jump into the GSM market place.
And contrary to many posters in this thread, GSMA was not asking for ALL apple iphone patents, simply those patents pertaining to GSM radio and feature space which were pertinent to handsets.
But Apple invented practically nothing in this regard, they simply used chipsets manufactured by others. They therefore, initially, claimed that all royalties were paid by Infineon and Broadcom and their other suppliers. This was wrong, of course, as the charter allowed no such escape, and indeed had pre-established rated for patent use by non-reciprocating companies.
And since Apple had very little to offer in return for the use of the pool patents, they were obligated to pay these rates. Apple stomped their foot and refused, and actually got away with it for far longer than they should have.
Had they joined the alliance, they would have had to offer a few minor patents they held, none of which are central to iPhone designs. They would have lost nothing virtually nothing, and paid much lower royalties. Now, they have more patents, largely regarding antenna design (flawed as that may be). Since LTE is based on GSM, Apple had no option but to settle this, because these patents are not going away anytime soon.
There are other patent holders in this pool, and I would expect to see the other member coming after Apple soon. With the precedent set, Erickson and Rim are going to want their royalties as well.
If I were Apple, I might be looking for a new Legal team. The one they have is the same one that told them to thumb their nose at the GSMA, and lost. You can bet they lost big, VERY BIG, or Apple would be crowing about how little it cost them to settle the issue.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.