Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Was Google's Motorola Mobility Acquisition a Mistake?

Posted by timothy on from the press-one-to-find-out dept.

Nerval's Lobster writes "Even before the Google acquisition, Motorola Mobility was engaged in a major legal battle with Microsoft, insisting that the latter needed to pay around $4 billion per year if it wanted to keep using Motorola's patents related to the H.264 video and 802.11 WiFi standards. (The patents in question affected the Xbox and other major Microsoft products.) Had that lawsuit succeeded as Motorola Mobility originally intended, it would have made Google a boatload of cash—but on April 25, a federal judge in Seattle ruled that Microsoft's royalty payments should total around $1.8 million per year. 'Based on Motorola's original demand of more than $4 billion per year from Microsoft,' patent expert Florian Mueller wrote in an April 26 posting on his FOSS Patents blog, 'it would have taken only about three years' worth of royalties for Microsoft to pay the $12.5 billion purchase price Google paid (in fact, way overpaid) for Motorola Mobility.' This latest courtroom defeat also throws into question the true worth of Motorola Mobility's patents. After all, if the best Google can earn from those patents is a few pennies-per-unit from its rivals' products, that may undermine the whole idea of paying $12.5 billion primarily for Motorola Mobility's intellectual-property portfolio.

13 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Everything was fine yesterday.... by ip_freely_2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one blinked an eye when Google paid what it did for Motorola. Now, one judge has brought out the critics and the second guessing. Unless you have a time machine, or can talk to every judge with a 'what-if', you can only do your due diligence. It's time to move on and look to the next problem, not rehash the past.

    1. Re:Everything was fine yesterday.... by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think a lot of people at the time of the purchase did raise that the price was too high. From other sources, who were also interested in the Motorola IP, the IP valuation I was hearing was ~$3B. Was the rest of Motorola worth $9B?

      The article is one sided, only mentioning INCOME from this IP.
      It hardly addresses the defensive aspect of having this IP in their back pocket.

      Who knows how many billion dollar judgements Apple might have been able to extract for bounce back scrolling or whatever. Having one of you own patents cover what you do pretty much makes it impossible for Apple or some random patent troll (pardon the redundancy) to come after you, saving billions of dollars.

      Patents have value beyond JUST a revenue stream. In fact, only a Patent Troll would think of patents ONLY as a revenue stream. Which makes the whole article somewhat suspect.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  2. Stopped reading at Florian by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I stopped reading when I saw the name Florian.

    He is a professional Troll, STOP POSTING HIS STUPID BULLSHIT!

    1. Re:Stopped reading at Florian by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Florian Microsoft is a paided shill. Don't quote him. He has a considerable record of being wrong. See Groklaw.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:Stopped reading at Florian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can think of one major difference: The way the names work with their bias.

      Groklaw doesn't give any wrong impressions. It doesn't necessarily leave a lot of impressions about any specific topic they're going to cover.

      FOSS Patents gives an impression that it would be in favor of FOSS, if you've never heard of it before. More often than not, the articles all support proprietary patent use and put down FOSS left and right.

      So, yeah. Right there, I'm a little biased to like Groklaw over FOSS Patents, because at least Groklaw's name isn't annoyingly deceptive.

      (Not DickBreath)

    3. Re:Stopped reading at Florian by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Others have challenged your claim that Groklaw is paid for by IBM, but even if it is, I can think of one important difference between Groklaw and Florian Mueller, Groklaw is often right.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  3. No. by HaeMaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How many lawsuits have been avoided because Google now has a formidable patent portfolio. Was the money spent on a nuclear arsenal wasted because there was no actual nuclear war?

    1. Re:No. by darkain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. The portfolio isn't about MAKING money. It is about PREVENTING THE LOSS OF MONEY.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_management

    2. Re:No. by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lots of mostly junk patents can be successfully used to extort money, or even ban competitors products from the market.

      Bouncy scrolling. Rectangles with rounded corners. Slide to unlock. Etc. Obviously these patents must be worth a mint, while Motorola's patents on actual underlying technology, developed by engineers in a lab, are worth little.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  4. Re:I thought it was all about Apple by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It was all about patent defense from trolls like Microsoft, Apple, Oracle and others. Google bought Motorola for one porpoise: using its patent portfolio defensively.



    New, bright and shiny, fish and clean -- all porpoise cleaner!

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  5. Epic fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quoting Florean Mueller that is.

  6. Re:I thought it was all about Apple by noh8rz10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    order of magnitude fail. aquisition was $12 billion, while the ruling has an annual value of $1.8 million. "Doh!" said eric schmidt.

  7. you forgot - it was all about florian by poetmatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a Florian Mueller article. It has no merit, no validity, and should be taken with the same grain of salt you'd take one of those folks who said the world would end in 12-12-2012.