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."
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
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
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.
Who says they're unreasonable? Maybe Moto's demands are...
Realizing that apple is offering quite a bit less then even half a pecent, and while recognizing that the patents are valid they refuse to be responsible for the past, it doesn't take much sanity to see Apple is trying to leverage the threat of a long drawn out lawsuit to avoid paying for their past infringement. It's exactly the kind of behavior that Googlerola should be putting them to the screws for, and seeing that they both have disposable lawyers sitting around, it's not unlikely either.
Google has yet to bring a product to market that the market really wants.
If I may quote Monty Python's 'Life of Brian': "All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us? "
Honestly, if you can't find anything that Google has brought to the table that the market "really wants" you just aren't paying attention.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
Two words: Cross-licensing.
Apple refuses to do it. Everyone else does. That's why we're here discussing this at all.
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
No, Apple is NOT asking to pay the same price as everyone else. Everyone else is cross-licensing, which Apple refuses to do. So if Samsung (for example) is giving Motorola licenses which would add up to 2.25% of the device if they were paid for in cash, then it is entirely fair and reasonable to expect Apple to cough up 2.25% in cash.
The crucial thing to remember is that the other companies that are getting cheaper deals are entering into full reciprocal patent sharing deals with Motorola. Often even one sided (Motorola gets all their patents; they get cheap access to the RAND patents). This is worth plenty and so Apple is completely outrageous to even think they should get a similar price without making a similar offer.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
That's using one market where Google has dominance and using it to affect another market. Microsoft got into a lot of trouble because of that. Google isn't likely to do that.
I predict Google will let it get dragged out and will make it as painful as possible for Apple.
Meanwhile, Google will continue its assault on Carriers' Customer Expectations by offering great prices on non-subsidized, unlocked devices. Google is changing some games. They won't need to fight too hard to defeat Apple. They just need to wear them out... and they can. There is an Army of Android device makers just WAITING for the opportunity to make the next Google Nexus devices. As we just saw, ASUS was having some trouble until it made the Nexus 7. Will HTC who is on the brink of death receive the next breath of life from Google? Possibly.
The point is that "open" and "free" (as in freedom) devices will quickly win the people over. They KNOW they are being tethered to Apple's way. They will soon lose out.
Apple's a big powerful badass. But Google is like a giant zen buddhist statue. It ain't going anywhere.
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.
By perfectly willing, you of course mean willing to make a lowball offer in an attempt to avoid being found guilty of willful infringement (or whichever the proper terming would be here). Of course, neither of us have actual numbers to compare either companies offer to, but this does show your eagerness to paint Apple in a favorable light.
The judge has ALREADY realized Motorola has possibly been trying to do exactly that.
Nice phrasing. Attempting to make it appear as if Motorola is already guilty while not technically saying anything incorrect. You should work in politics. Of course you are digging heavily into "maybes", as nothing has been decided in that case, outside of the Judge deciding to look into it.
now now, apple has shown it's more than capable of doing business without Google.
Look at the wonderful maps they came up with!
dreaded scurrilous bit-twiddler from Oklahoma
The F part comes from cross licensing deals to make things fair. Apple has no standards-essential patents that are being requested, so there's no cross licensing for those items.
Apple's patents, since not FRAND-eligible, aren't being offered at reasonable rates. If I have a deal that I can use my neighbour's pool if they can use my trampoline, that's FRAND. But if you want to use my trampoline and tell me I'm not allowed to play in your tree fort because the FRAND deal is only applicable to ground constructs, then fuck you, pay me $10 to use my trampoline.
Keep on knockin'
https://robbiecrash.me
So Motorola is trying to charge Apple what they were charging Microsoft? How is that "way more than other companies who also license the same technology"?
The big difference is that MotoGoog is suing for hardware patents and not some worthless software UI patents that should have never existed in the first place. Hardware takes tens of millions of man hours and just as many dollars to develop over the course of many years. Software UI takes 1 guy about 1 day and doesn't even rise to the level of something that should be patented. The only reason software UI gets patents is because of very, very stupid patent clerks (where's Einstein when we need him!?). Furthermore, Apple brought this on themselves for trying to block their competition through the courts. If it was any other company I would say shame on Google. But because it's Apple I say beat them until the candy comes out.
Apropos Apples misuse of FRAND hardware started before Google acquired Motorola. Apple offered to trade its (now proven) worthless UI patents for licensing of the FRAND hardware and was turned down by Motorola, who wanted licensing fees. Of course they refused to give a dime to Motorola and used the patented hardware anyway. IMO Apple should be charged at the going rate for these FRAND patent licences but with a puinitive muliplier of *5-*10 retoroactivly for beliveing that they are above the law. Above the very law they attempted to use to squash their comitition in court. In this case, Google is "Do[ing] No Evil". It's more like The Hulk beating the shit out of Loki. Totally justified and righteous.
I didn't really see any fanboyism in the parent post. More like realism.
It has a tiny screen, a non-removable battery, a non-standard connector, no microSD port, and no NFC chip. Also, it is no longer king in battery life. While I am not if sure they have fixed it yet or not, at release, they apparently didn't even have a decent map application for it. From a OS standpoint, Android has finally gotten to the point where it is at least as polished as iOS if not more polished. Some of the top Android phones are even coming out this cool new features that aren't even part of the stock Android OS. I haven't heard of any awesome new features in Apple since Siri. Siri is probably one of Apple's bigger advantages but Google has been making strides to lessen that advantage with Google Now and voice searching. Apple also has the advantage on manufacture support in pushing OS updates but then again, Apple has a nasty habit of keeping out the coolest new features on its older models. Overall, I am thoroughly unimpressed by Apples newest iPhone. It used to be that Apple was one of the first with new awesome features. Apple can't keep customers based on past successes forever.
IIRC, 2.25% has been the ongoing rate. The only reason why other companies haven't paid as much is because they've cross-licensed their patents to Moto instead, and that is not exactly a free service. Apple is unwilling to cross-license (or rather they claim that their patents are worth a ridiculous amount that Moto disagrees with), and so Moto wants to charge them the baseline 2.25% fee. Seems perfectly fair to me.
..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."