Slashdot Mirror
To Mollify Google on Moto Patents, Apple Proposes $1/Device Fee
An anonymous reader writes "Motorola feels that Apple is infringing on several FRAND patents that have to do with how every smartphone in existence connects to WiFi and cellular networks. Since Apple makes smartphones, and Google is looking to use their newly acquired Motorola as a weapon, the two companies are only a few days away from the courtroom. Apple has conceded that the Moto patents are valid by offering to pay Google/Moto $1 per device, but only going forward. Motorola wants 2.25% per device and for it to cover all Apple devices (back dated). If Motorola pursues the case and the court issues a per device rate that is higher than Apple's offer, Apple promises to pursue all possible appeals to avoid paying more than $1. Motorola could end this quickly, or watch as Apple drags this out for what could be years."
Now negotiations can begin. The negotiations will be short.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
By not negotiating in good faith Apple seems to be setting itself up to lose badly in court. Surely any court will look at Apple's demands as unreasonable, given that they back them up with the threat of a protracted legal process costing tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
If $2.25 is simimar to what they have licensed it to others for, then Apple will have a hard job arguing that it isn't FRAND, and therefore that Moto shouldn't be allowed to enforce the patents.
I'm also fairly sure that FRAND doesn't mean that you're free to infringe until you get caught.
Anyway, bad as patents seem to be I'd love to see Apple get absoloutely battered because of patent infringements, because they insist on doing it to others. Hoist on their own petard and all.
Perhaps it will convince them to divert their lobbying power to removing patents.
Just kidding!
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Isn't this the same type of behavior that the Apple faithful hated about Microsoft in years past? Or was that just the Slashdot crowd in general?
This is surely simple; Apple is using Motorolas patents; if they will not accept the FRAND offered by Moto then a Judge will surely be willing to grant a injunction against sales and promotion of all infringing products. As apple themselves have shown, this need not take years.
Or do fanbois think that 'rounded corners' drawn by one of their case designers a few years back represents a more important piece of IP than the detailed algorithms controlling signalling in a congested radio band that took real scientists and engineers years of research and skill to develop?
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
Think about what could be made if, instead of burning all of this money for a Pyrrhic victory against each other, Google and Apple spent all of that money on development. That would be nice. That would be neighborly.
Apple, Google: Listen to Mr. Rogers's ghost. Why won't you be each other's neighbors?
I have no idea if Apple's $1 figure is fair. It's probably a lowball figure to negotiate from.
But I am sure Motorola's counter of a percentage based on device cost is NOT fair. After all, the only difference between a 64GB iPhone and a 32GB iPhone is the amount of RAM, yet Apple would have to pay Motorola more for a license from the more expensive phone! That is ridiculous.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
AFAIK Apple has always agreed the patents are valid, they have however refused to pay UNFAIR fees.
Put it another way,what Motorola is asking for is like a Tyre company charging for a tyre based on what your car is worth, or the exact same tyre.
Apple is asking to pay the same price as everyone else.
Love/Hate Apple as much as you like, but if it was you buying the tyre for your car would you think it is Fair, Reasonable to pay 10 times the price someone else does simply because your car costs more ?
At what $ value did Motorola license these patents to other companies?
I wonder if we can sense any consistency from the pro-Google now that Motorola (ie Google) has decided to go ahead and sue Apple. We all know the general feeling on Slashdot has been driven by people who feel that Apple should not be able to protect what it feels are its important patents - now that Google is on the warpath, is it possible that we will see them maintain a consistent position regarding how "evil" patent lawsuits are and that they are "holding back technology?" Or will they simply take the line that, "Well, it's ok if Google does it because I either work for them, or I have such tunnel vision that I can't see the hypocrisy that everybody else sees in me?"
Anyway, this will be a delicious bunch of posts to read - the screeds will be incoherent, filled with vague and un-provable legal prognostication, and cause many particles of sand to become lodged in many, many manginas (pre- and post-op).
Happy posting everybody!
Motorola could end this quickly, or watch as Apple drags this out for what could be years.
This implies that Motorola should bow gracefully to its Apple overlords, and accept the fact it is lucky to get table scraps. The patents are valid and Apple has been infringing. I would normally just say WTF? but then I saw it posted by Timothy :(
As far as "what has been offered' to others, then why does not Samsung give $2.50 to Apple. After all most Android devices pay 10-15 dollars to MS per device because MS owns *nix and all smartphone patens, so everything that is going make a call is going to have pay MS. money. OTOH, instead of just paying Apple, who also claims to own everything smartphone, they fight.
This is pretty much just a fight over who is going profit off the crumbs of the people who actually do the work to bring an innovative product. Google has yet to bring a product to market that the market really wants. The same with MS. Samsung has a leg to stand on, but because it has caved and paid money to MS, who has no real claim to it, they are kind of screwed, It is like paying for black mail. One you pay, you are stuck.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Let's get to the point where no one can make a phone anymore. That seems to be the only way we'll see the patent system get reformed.
Apple sure do have a pair of huge balls.
One day they'll stumble over 'em.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Google is giving Apple a taste of its own medicine.
How does this not get resolved by: "Sheesh, okay. Stop suing us, and we'll stop suing you. You can use our really dumb patents, we can use yours."
Oh, right. Lawyers are involved.
it says 'Apple’s offer makes it clear they accept Motorola’s patents are valid, so now it’s just a squabble over their value.'
Not really, maybe they just figured it was cheaper to pay $1 going forward than pay lawyers to get a fair agreement.
I wonder what the patent number is?
How about Google just asking Apple to not charge Samsung a billion dollars and call it even.
Greed, or logic?
its not like apple ( or google ) will lose a dime anyway, as the extra cost incurred just gets passed along to the consumer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yes, this is a typical response, exactly what I expected. I'm glad to see that I'm not going to be disappointed in this thread!
Pray tell, doesn't this go against Google's pledge to "only use patents defensively" which I often hear quoted here? Is it OK to abandon another one of your principles (Don't Be Evil was clearly just something that you repeated to suckers) when it suits you?
Take $0 and a contract stating they will not sue any Android distributer in the future for patents.
They deserve to be buried by Google/Motorola. $1000/device, final offer you bastards.
MOTO owns the fundamental patent they must share
SO...
GOOG is spoiling for a fight
AND
AAPL stands to rights recognizing its validity and fundamental offer requested to pay
SCOTUS
will decide restraint of trade on this one
Dear Apple, Samsung and other companies,
Patents are a tool to help the people of a society. If you continue to abuse this tool, we the people will ban all patents or take other steps necessary to see that they are used properly.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
A fixed fee would block out cheap devices
First of all - cheap device with LTE??
Secondly - How exactly would it block cheap devices? A fee of $1 would certainly not block cheap devices from existing. Furthermore I don't think a percentage fee is all that fair for Motorola in the case of a $20 phone, then they get paid a pittance for a technology they worked hard to develop.
The only really fair way to approach fees for patents used in standards is a clear and unchanging fee charged per device, so that anyone contemplating using that technology in a device has an up-front understanding what it adds to the cost.
If anything it's fairer than a fixed fee.
So you really think it's right for Motorola to get paid more because you decide to add more RAM, or USB ports, or a better screen to a device...
In that world you get devices that have lower quality components because it adds to the royalty fees you have to pay.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
companies are like children, and can't be trusted to play with sharp, pointy objects. actually, it's more like they were digging in the back yard and found a buried mine that happened to be a neutron bomb. they're poking at it with sticks now.
society created the whole concept of IP, and we need to clean it up now, before it causes more damage.
Apple chose to use the "nuclear option," and have no-one to blame but themselves. These things are typically settled reasonably ... compare patent stacks, few pennies go to the one with the taller stack. But no, Apple has shown they don't play nice. Everyone with any sense will be hostile toward Apple. Prisoner's Dilemma, basically, except everyone knows ahead of time that Apple defects.
Apple can't win this way in the long run. They may have a big pile of cash, but if everything they want to do suddenly gets nickel-and-dimed, they'll find that only goes so far.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
You mean attacking those who attack you is not defense?
Should they just take it?
Besides this is motorola pursuing a lawsuit that started before Google bought them.
So I suppose Google, with a *slight* vestment in Android, should just sit back and watch Apple start a war with a number of Android phone manufacturers?
I also suppose that even though a person may think violence is bad, that it's inconsistant behavior for them if they tried to fight back while they're being mugged.
I suppose that's ok as long as you're either an Apple zealot, blind idealist, or don't mind being mugged.
Hey, I've got a better idea! This thread will be for discussing the know-it-all asshole who thinks he's so clever because he can rush to conclusions from a false assumption (Google == Motorola, implying that all of Motorola's decisions are now directly made by Google and that all of Motorola's executives have been swiftly replaced in the amount of time since the sale was finalized, which, as anyone familiar with any company larger than a lemonade stand can attest to, is an absurd (some would say "wrong") assumption) and make smug comments about every person who responds to him! He certainly helps the discussion by giving him an apparently much-needed avenue to stroke his fragile ego!
Oh, almost forgot: This thread doesn't concern you, RocketRabbit. The grown-ups are talking now.
I personally don't believe in software patents at all, but you have to admit this is poetic justice. If I was Google, I'd aquire as many patents against apple as I could and everytime they sued someone for some stupid patent, I'd return the favor.
Apple really seems to have been going out of its way to piss off courts recently. First the event in Britain where they basically thumbed their nose at the Appeals Court and defied their order about posting the apology. Now they're pre-emptively threatening the court in Wisconsin, saying that if they don't get what they want, they are going to go all-out with appeals. While judges know their decisions are subject to appeal, they very much do not like being publicly threatened in such a manner by litigants, especially while the trial is still going on. I think they may have bought themselves a world of pain with this verdict when it finally comes. And appeals courts will be all the more likely to look at Apple's filings with a skeptical eye now that they've already told all the world they are doing it as part of a hardball business strategy.
Pray tell, doesn't this go against Google's pledge to "only use patents defensively" which I often hear quoted here?
While I don't particularly take Google's side (I see both companies as a plague at times), one could apply the adage: "The best defense is a good offense".
Apple has an impressive set of testicles.
then a Judge will surely be willing to grant a injunction against sales and promotion of all infringing products.
Nope. Read this related review of Microsoft vs. Google (er, Motorola) on FRAND
Basically judges everywhere agree you cannot use FRAND as a tool to extort way more money from successful companies than from others. The only question at hand is how much money Apple (and Microsoft) will be paying - even if Apple appeals it simply means delaying when they are paying Motorola, but will not result in Apple devices being blocked from sale.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Two things:
First, I think that most people here feel that technical patents are somewhat more valid than design patents. While there are a number of people who think that patents as a whole are bad, but most people think that patents are okay, it's patents on things like "rounded corners" (aka design patents) that people dislike.
Secondly, if you attack someone who attacks you, are you being offensive or defensive? It's not immediately clear if retaliating after being attacked is a defensive action or an offensive one.
I think Apple knows this offer will not be taken, but they decided to make one to make their position in the eventual lawsuit stronger. One of Google/Motorola's arguments against Microsoft is that Microsoft will not negotiate, so Google/Motorola could not have violated their FRAND obligations.
"Sometimes it's hard to tell the dancer from the dance." --Corwin Of Amber in CoC
The courts will hopefully realize this isn't the first time Apple has been caught using a competitors patented technology
And when was that exactly?
Because so far, Apple has been perfecting willing to pay for FRAND related patent use, but not willing to pay way more than other companies who also licence the same technology which is what Motorola has been demanding.
The judge has ALREADY realized Motorola has possibly been trying to do exactly that.
In that very similar case of Microsoft vs. Motorola, Motorola may have demanded way more than would in fact be "R" from FRAND (reasonable). If that is the case the Google is the one in trouble, not Microsoft or Apple because you cannot join an FRAND patent pool and then extort specific licensees with outrageous fees.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So I guess once anybody sues Google, no matter how justified they are ultimately found to be, that Google can abandon its principles and continue suing them indefinitely?
I don't really give a shit about it either way, it's just hilarious to see the attitude on display here. When Apple does something, it's bad, but when Google does it, it's ok.
My personal opinion, as a lawful concealed carrier who always packs heat, is that I would not wait to be physically damaged by an attacker before ventilating them. The threat of severe bodily harm and / or death is enough to justify the use of lethal force. But we're talking about two gigantic companies, both doing slightly different things to each other. Apple wanted the most blatant of the iPhone and iPad knockoffs banned, while Google is trying to extort money.
Definitely drag it out, no question about that. Keep that willful infringement sword dangling over Apple's stock price. Apple might just get what it wished for.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Sure. After all, Android was nothing but a knockoff of the look n' feel of the early iPhones anyway. Why wouldn't Apple try to eliminate the clones? They have done this consistently with companies that knocked them off since the 1980s. Franklin, Microsoft, the Apple clones, you name it.
Then we could say ya, we downloaded your songs illegally, and from this day forward, if we do it, we'll pay you $1 per song.
Be seeing you...
Yet another argument for abolishing the patent system as it currently exists. Minimally, disallow the ownership of patents by corporations with more than a minimal capitalization. The purpose of patents was to encourage INDIVIDUAL initiative, not to bog down capital in endless, winner-free courtroom battles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgTBxHhYno
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Whats wrong, Apple doesnt like the taste of their own medicine???? Odd~~
sent by iPhone
The board was Googlized, and Google now owns Motorola, so yes, Motorola is nothing more than the hardware arm of Google at this point.
Let's see a reliable source. Everyone knows Florian Mueller is a laughable shill.
I actually didn't know that; I just found that article on Google while reading about FRAND cases. Since it cites a number of cases that are public and have already been decided, I was hard pressed to find it anything but plainly factual with a touch of analysis added on top.
If you would care to find an article that interprets the court results in a different way, by all means post it. But in the meantime I think your bias against this person is clouding your ability to understand simple facts.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't really feel that the virtues or values of patents can be argued any more. When you can secure a patent for doing something that somebody has done for 25 years, but "in a cell phone" you know that the technical patent system is just as screwed as anything.
Secondly, I personally support both Apple and Google's lawsuits. Hopefully they completely destroy one another. It is only when all companies have deadlocked each other in a patent death-grip, and none are able to do anything whatsoever, that they will force Congress to actually reform the broken system that allows this kind of bullshit to occur in the first place.
I think Apple has the decimal placed 4 numbers to the left. Rounded corners ought to be worth less than $0.002 - especially since they've been around for thousands of years.
Can't wait to see them have to pay double as penalty for flagrantly and knowingly violating Google's patents.
I suspect Motorola wants no money and instead just patent cross licensing. Seems FRAND to me.
I hope google presses this as hard as they can and the end result is crippling for apple. Google went to apple years ago suggesting that the "big 3" should get together and stop the patents wars so they could spend money on R&D and make the world a better place rather than just sue each other over decades old tech. Apple said no and as a results google pays almost double and apple almost five times more on patent lawsuits and protection than R&D.
There could be no greater justice, and no single change more positive to the tech world, then apple losing billions to this.
If this was true, why are all (even the newest) Google devices made by Samsung? Surely Motorola would have been capable (Droid, etc).
I didn't know an OS could actually clone a hardware. That's some pretty fancy magic there.
Apple created a refined product that in turn created a market for touchscreen smartphones. Google saw the opportunity and created an OS that would allow people other than Apple to create touchscreen smartphones efficiently. Could you point to the sections of the Android code where Google copied and pasted code from the iOS? Surely it can't be too hard since Apple is o'so open about what they develop.
money is made round to go round......
Actually, apple is now screwed.
Their entire case on the west coast was predicated on "we were harmed by their unreasonable terms" Apple quite literally just gave the judge evidence of the exact opposite of their claims in court, by now making a FRand offer. House of cards -> fallen apart.
Google doesn't need to block apple, nor will they. They also don't have to accept this offer from Apple. This also won't resolve any of apple's past infringement, should that part of this process move forward. However, this shows one thing right away: apple is now fucked, and no longer the aggressor in the situation. Not that it's much of a surprise considering they're losing in every court on the planet.
I don't think Google cares who makes the phones, as long as Google sells the ads and can use its spyware on them uninhibited.
They C&D'd that one fella for making a Droid ROM that blocked their spyware, remember.
I am rooting for google to fight apple and they are one of the handful companies, who can do that, financially speaking, without going bankrupt. Apple needs to get a dose of their own medicine IMHO. Let them eat back the workds of the iConMan Steve Jobs, going to thermonuclear war against the android.
I am so looking forward to this one.
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
Just drop all patents alike and be done with it, all progress is based on previous progress, all inventors have special knowledge of their inventions, there is no need for monopolies.
Thanks, that was a pretty informative read on the subject. I would indeed say then there is a risk for Apple (or Microsoft) that a sales injunction could be brought into play...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
LOL. While I am pro-android (have code in Linux and other OSS), I have always like OSX. And I used to tell older ppl, as well as total idiots, to use IOS (though I no longer do because they are having problems seeing those small screens).
BUT, it was Apple that started this patent battle. They have dragged all sorts of garbage in the courts and are looking to lose many of the patents that they do not deserve (which is a good thing) that they used to make their points. Now, Motorola has a NUMBER of patents that pretty much block Apple. Yet, apple does not want to X-patent. That is fine. But then you have to be ready to pay the price. Apple is simply object to a STANDARD amount of money. In addition, they do not want to pay for their past theft.
At this time, I would love to see Moto sue to have ALL apple phones and tablets blocked from the US. They set the precedence for this, and it makes sense for it to be applied back to them.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Let me see if I understand this correctly. You think that it is OK for Apple to go on the offense and use a number of BS patents to try and stop competitors, BUT, when the competitors then sue Apple for their THEFT of HONEST patents, you think that it is wrong? Seriously?
Google is being defensive about this, not offensive. If they were offensive, they would go after MS as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
And yet, Android was actually started BEFORE iphone. Just amazing.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
No, I'm afraid that you don't understand this correctly. I never said Apple or Google are in the wrong for subjecting each other to expensive and time-consuming patent litigation. I think it's wonderful actually - the only way this broken system will be fixed is if enough large companies totally cripple each other in the legal system. Only then will they eventually bribe Congress into a patent reform.
The Franklin clones actually ripped off the Apple ROMs - are ROMs hardware or software?
Google saw an opportunity to steal the entire iPhone concept while they had a spy on the Apple board. If you don't accept this then please look at one of the many before and after the iPhone images available on Google that show how Android looked before the iPhone (hint: Android was shit inn'it) and eat some humble pie with a side serving of crow jelly.
Apple has aggressively defended its look and feel probably since before you were born.
Yes, and have you seen what Android looked like before Google's spy on Apple's board lifted their iPhone UI design whole cloth?
It was a fucking Blackberry clone, but only more half-assed. There wasn't any multitouch, hell there wasn't any touch at all! The thing had one of those awful little keyboards, one of those stupid trackballs (or a joystick, either way it was stupid) and it was just a massive pile of fail.
Hell, in this patent climate, I think anybody should do anything. Declining to pay the patent fees was a business decision, and Googlearola's decision to sue was also a business decision.
Apple has the patents on multi-touch phone and tablet UIs, so I would expect this to work out very, very badly for Google and gang if Apple decides to assert those patents. I would love to see such a suit, whatever way it ended up.
Also, if you think Android is "OSS" you're mistaken. It's a Linux distro with many proprietary and non-free blobs attached to it. Some effort has been made at replacing those with Free software, but they only work on a select few older phones. Google is about as serious about Open Source and Free Software as Apple is - perhaps Apple is even more serious.
Motoroogle is looking for some quick cash to float their ledgers, anyway, so it seems to me that they'll settle in the end. Remember, Google's financial books are a bit funny smelling as of late, and they certainly can't afford to just waste endless cash.
..I'm guessing that 'The rise and fall of Apple' will make for a compelling Harvard Business Review case study.
"..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
There was actually both keyboard and joystick and touch based prototypes. Eric Schmidt actually sat out of iPhone meetings for exactly this reason, and other board members knew about Android development.
Any other old false memes?
Trying to make sure I understand your logic. Company Y says they will only use patents defensively. Company X makes no such claim. When company X sues company Y first, it's ok, but if company Y countersues only company X after having been sued first, it's bad?
:(){
Your anonymous lies do not impress me. Yes, they had touch-based prototypes, but only AFTER Eric Shidt spied out Apple's plane.
Shit, even now, 5 years later, they are still struggling to catch up to Apple. See, when your only skill is copying, that's what you have to do to get by. The disadvantage of the copying tactic, though, is that you will never actually get ahead - you can simply shift down into neutral and wait to see what Apple does in its next rev of the iPhone, and then attempt to clone it before they release yet another iteration.
This is the same cycle that Microsoft has been stuck in for ages now - since the 80s.
Simple solution... Apple gets rights to motorola patents, Googorola gets all its partners and android device manufacturers rights to whatever patents apple thinks they are infringing on and keep suing everyone for. Everybody pays less court and licensing costs, scumbag lawyers lose their biggest clients, consumers get the devices they want, everybody wins.
If I remember by Apple rumor mill correctly from back in the day of the $5 a share price, Jobs called Moto to discuss the PowerPC clone market and the conversation ended with JObs screaming about how it will be great when they didn't need Motorola anymore.
Why should Apple give a damn about $15 or $20 more for the iPhone? I don't see Apple fans complaining about the prices they pay now, what's a few more quid?
Nope, you have failed to understand. My logic says that the patent system is so fucked, that the more companies that get a death-grip on their competitors through the use of patents, the better, because only that will lead to reform of the system.
I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy that is displayed by Google fans, who have been claiming for a couple of years now that Google isn't "evil" and that they will use their patents "only defensively."
I guess if your rationale is that a good offense is the best defense, then you can claim that a pre-emptive defensive lawsuit is indeed consistent, but this is a sort of Jesuitical hair-splitting tactic that needs no further comment.
While I fully agree with with you wrote this time, the real issue is that in your initial post and most of the others, you appear to be blaming Google for responding back to Apple's insane attitude.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Odd. I see Apple begging Google to help them catch up. Apple's mapping sux. They only recently caught up to voice control by buying seri, but are going to lose out again. Android Catching up to IOS? Nope. In this case, it is a case of one upsmanship between the two. The difference is that Apple continues to do this over and over by themselves like Beta, while Google acts more like VHS.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
A lot of people seem wrongheaded about FRAND patents and I think it is because they are trying to justify pre-existing beliefs born of like or dislike of one of the litigants involved in this case. So lets just talk about FRAND in general terms using current developments in the auto industry.
Electric cars, the next big thing and they need to be able to charge the batteries. So, having many different connectors is inefficient and a standard for plugs is needed if we're ever going to build out infrastructure. But wait there are many ways to do it and many companies that already have patents on lots of potential solutions. Should we:
Generally, because it is industry players, we go with the second option, but does that mean auto-makers that were not making electric cars at the time the standard was made and who don't have patents involved in the standard should be forever frozen out of the market? Does that mean no new car companies will ever be allowed into the market? Because to make a new charging standard there are likely hundreds of patents and even if each one only demands .5% of the sale price of a vehicle, that quickly adds up to 100% for all companies that don't have patents in the pool. Does anyone here think that is reasonable for a standard or in any way good for innovation or society as a whole?
Standards are supposed to be about collaboration and reducing just this kind of bullshit and FRAND licensing is a necessary part of that, which is why you aren't allowed to price things discriminatorily in the first place. Google/Motorola is free to license or not license any non-FRAND patents to Apple or anyone else and charge any rate they damn well please. Apple is likewise free to license or not license any non-FRAND patents they damn well please. People conflating the two issues are missing the point and are cheering on abuse of the standard creation process and the end of the ability of any upstart company to engage in using standards. It's cheering on forcing the industry into stagnation and preventing the competitive marketplace and consumers from determining what is the best device... but maybe that's secretly what some people want. They don't want competition to result in the best product. They just want their "team" to win so they feel better about their purchase. Shame.
Apple: Our iDevice is now FREE but requires an iCloud account. iCloud is $39 a month.
Motorola: Hey, where's our 2.25%?
Apple: Hahahahaha.
Apple ditched Google, they weren't begging for anything. It makes sense, as the Google experience is custom-designed to sell Google ads on the Google phone OS.
In any event, I don't think that Google has even come close to catching up to Apple in smartphone market share. You can quote all the massaged numbers from IT consultancies, but the only ones that really matter (and the only ones are actually trustable, are the ones from Wikipedia's stat counter. They show Apple ahead by a clear margin, even after the cheap Droid phones have been dumped on the market for years now.
Read Steve Jobs biography, and Steve Ballmers chair throwing. Companies have no feelings, the people that run them do.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The mobile phone companies do a LOT of cross licensing, everyone contributes a bit, this bring the price down. Apple doesn't cross license, so it has to pay more.
And just take a look at what Apples partner in crime demands per android phone in license fees.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Such arrangements NEVER stand on their own and part of the whole FRAND deal involves cross-licensing. I got 1 patent, you got 2, we cross-license and since I only got 1 and you got pay I pay you some money as well to balance things out.
FRAND is not a shop that sells licenses to any buyer, it is far more complex. And Apple has no patents to cross-license. It also knowingly avoided paying for years and refuses to pay those years. It acted in bad faith. That means gentleman agreements are out the door.
Do some research and you find that prices do indeed vary for FRAND licensing depending on the parties involved. It is NOT one price for all.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Any news on what Motorola's patents actually are, or are we all so bored of patent litigation that we just don't care any more?
Nuclear weapons are supposed to be deterrents as in the MAD principal. If you you engage them ... then the outcome might be assured. Apple it's not too late to not be a prick.
...and take one for the team. Because from there on out, Apple couldn't ask for more than $1 per device for any "infringing" devices in an on-going basis.
Seriously - how could ANY court let them get more than they are willing to give? :)
A company so arrogant that wanted to charge Samsung $30 - $40 per phone for infringing Apple's patents, yet will only offer $1 a phone when they infringe other people's patents. Apple has officially become the smuggest company ever and must be capable of chewing on their own smug farts at this point.
Anyways, Apple aside, the whole software/mobile industry needs to be slapped for both creating and continuing all this patent whoring. The whole point of a patent is to show the world your innovations, and thus encourage cooperation in innovation, not use it as a weapon against competition. What I don't understand is how the hell any company will release a product these days without doing some form of basic patent search.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
All devices that use the 30 pin dock connector pay a licensing fee to Apple for the privilege. They also get to put a "Made for iPhone" (or whatever) sticker on the box.
The cost is rumored to be the greater of 10% or $10. (These prices are subject to NDA and probably change depending on deals made with the accessory manufacturer, so I wouldn't necessarily take the exact number as factual). I believe the cost of the connector component itself is extra.
So, a simple $80 iHome stereo system has $10 going to Apple. A $400 Bose system would be closer to $40. I can only hope that BMW made some sort of arrangement so that it's not 10% of the cost of a new car.
And Apple wants to pay $1 per phone for some very significant patent licenses. What hypocrites!
The deal that would really make sense for Google to make would be a full cross-licensing agreement with Apple. That would, of course, end all the suits against Android so I don't expect to see Apple agree to one.
It's a camera - that uses the network to upload picture and video. It's a music/video player - that uses the network to stream or download media. etc. etc.
I'm not ignoring your point, just pointing out that even with multiple modalities of usage, the Moto patents apply to all. So in this particular case, the Moto patents don't work as an example of your argument.
"Ahh! I see you're in that indeterminate Schrodinger state where - oh, uh
But is Google really responding to Apple's anti-Samsung lawsuit here? To me it seems like another battle, not the same one, and in light of Google's promises not to be evil, not to use its patents except defensively, and the idea that Apple didn't sue "Android" but some corrupt gigantic Korean megacorp makes me feel that the Google supporters who condemned Apple's lawsuit then, but do not also condemn Google now, are hypocrites.
Why would wiki's stat counter be the only one that matters and not the massive number of android phones that have been sold?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
We know a lot of Android phones have been manufactured, but nobody will admit to how many are actually sold. Companies are hired by PR firms representing Google and Samsung to cook up numbers based upon statistics from very odd places, which they try to actually pass off as retail sales, but this is of course just a big giant trick.
Wikipedia's reliable because everybody uses it. These other "sales" figures count phones that are sitting in warehouses, destined to be sent back to whatever sweatshop they were built in and recycled.
Google/Motorola should counter offer 2.25% for all past sales (how can those be ignored because those were sold without a valid license?) and then $1/device for any new sales (legally licensed now). A judge would accept that and any delaying tactices would probably just add on more costs and drag down Apple's stock price.
Apple has lied about every lawsuit it has fought, especially the first one against the Beatle's Apple Records when it said it would never get into the music business (3 years before iTunes).