Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Court Bans Sale of Xiaomi Smartphones In India

Posted by samzenpus on from the no-phone-for-you dept.

hypnosec writes The Delhi High Court has banned Xiaomi and India online retailer Flipkart from selling any handsets that Ericsson claim are violating patents. The court has also asked Xiaomi and its agents to refrain from making, assembling, importing or selling any devices which infringe the patents in question. Xiaomi says: "We haven’t received an official note from the Delhi High Court. However, our legal team is currently evaluating the situation based on the information we have. India is a very important market for Xiaomi and we will respond promptly as needed and in full compliance with India laws. Moreover, we are open to working with Ericsson to resolve this matter amicably."

40 comments

  1. Translation... by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We haven’t received an official note from the Delhi High Court. However, our legal team is currently evaluating the situation based on the information we have. India is a very important market for Xiaomi and we will respond promptly as needed and in full compliance with India laws. Moreover, we are open to working with Ericsson to resolve this matter amicably."

    Translation: Now that we have infringed all of your patents we are willing to come to an agreement with you but only because you have finally got us by the short and curlies after a long court battle and not because we feel bound by international treaties signed by the Peoples Republic of China since those are only binding for people infringing on our patents.

    1. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Sounds more like Ericsson is trying to extort money now that they don't have much of a phone business.

    2. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alternatively, it could be that Ericsson don't have much to do with the phone business because other people have stolen their tech and forced them out of it ;)

    3. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      In real life on the other hand, Erikson lost to Nokia and had to sell out to Sony.

      This appears to be straight forward patent trolling, as Erikson's phone business is owned by Sony now.

    4. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's a weak and pathetic excuse.

      If someone has the same technology as you, you're on a level playing ground. The fact of the matter is Ericsson weren't innovative, didn't have strong products, and they lost.

      Now they're a patent troll puppet for Sony - I hope Xiaomi just get a hit out on the people at hand, using patents on math/software/genetics deserves no less than a swift and decisive physical response.

    5. Re:Translation... by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "We haven’t received an official note from the Delhi High Court. However, our legal team is currently evaluating the situation based on the information we have. India is a very important market for Xiaomi and we will respond promptly as needed and in full compliance with India laws. Moreover, we are open to working with Ericsson to resolve this matter amicably."

      Translation: Now that we have infringed all of your patents we are willing to come to an agreement with you but only because you have finally got us by the short and curlies after a long court battle and not because we feel bound by international treaties signed by the Peoples Republic of China since those are only binding for people infringing on our patents.

      More like the court issued a ruling that's not even remotely legal:

      Therefore, it appears that this order of the Delhi High Court’s injunction order is not in conformance either with international practice or domestic case law.

      http://spicyip.com/2014/12/bre...

      Ericson filed suit, incorrectly, with the highest court. In india, it appears this is not legal, they need to file with a lower court and it get escalated. Xiaomi did not reply to this suit, because they rightly judged it to be out of its jurisdiction. Several other companies were included in the suit, and the replied. The court issued the injunction ex parte, because Xiaomi didn't appear. But the court was wrong to hear the case in the first place so, even its injunction is no legit.

      And that's before we even get into the merits of the case, which haven't even been considered yet. So your suggestion that they infringed at all is completely baseless. All we have proof of is that Ericson filed suit in a court with no jurisdiction and Xiamoi ignored it.

    6. Re:Translation... by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's this http://www.ericsson.com/thecom...

      that is, the network ericsson, splitted away from the phone biz long time ago. they sell networks to network operators.

      basically, it's pretty probable that you can't do a 3g phone without infringing. that's kinda shitty of course, since if you want to make a mobile phone that works on standard networks.... but its not just a patent troll as such. however, the india court probably should have just said that they're standard essential and fucked them over.

      and all the big traditional players have cross license agreements, so this shit doesn't apply to them. it's only to keep new manufacturers away from the markets.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 2

      *Ehum*

      Ericsson value: 40 billion USD
      Nokia value: 30 billion USD
      Sony: 23.6 billion USD
      Motorola Solutions (sold network part to Nokia): 15.6 billion USD.
      (All stocks counted using Google finance?)

      Ericsson P/E: 23.18
      Nokia P/E: 60.30
      Motorola Solutions P/E: 26.80

      It's true Nokia was the biggest of them all in phones. It's true Ericsson started to make phones with Sony and later let them take over all of it.

      And as for Nokias phone business I guess we all kinda know where they are now and how much wealth that generated lately ..

      I assume Ericsson or Huawei are the largest players in the Network field.

      Ericsson may have lost its phone business to Sony:
      31 Oct 2014:
      "PlayStation profits up but Sony on course for £1.2 billion loss", metro.co.uk
      Ericsson seem to be the more healthy company ..

      31 Juli wsj.com:
      "But Sony's mobile-phone unit, which a year ago had been the company's most profitable electronics division, posted an operating loss amid sagging sales."

      Not that I've looked into it a lot. But I'm not sure you're giving Ericsson enough credit.

      https://www.google.com/finance...
      Says 3.7 billion for Huawei but I don't know whatever it's all the stocks and if it's of any use.
      Likely not:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
      Says $3.46 billion in profit 2013.

    8. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: Now that we have infringed all of your patents ...

      You don't say???

      Xiaomi's phones come with Qualcomm's chip, and is protected under Qualcomm's patent canopy

      Ericsson's move is nothing more than patent extortion

    9. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      That's not how large aquisitions work.

      Eriksson, like most early mobile companies had two major arms - networks and mobile phones. This is because early development work was mostly in developing both network and phone side elements.

      It's mobile phone arm was a massive loss leader, largely crushed by Nokia Mobile Phones unit in early 2000s. They first fused it with Sony's tiny one, forming a co-owned Sony-Eriksson unit. Then in 2012 Sony bought Eriksson out of the business, at which point Eriksson focused on mobile networks. This left Eriksson with a healthy stack of patents out of the deal, which it uses here to troll other mobile phone manufacturers.

      This is the same risk that competition watchdogs in various countries feared to come from Nokia after MS purchased its mobile phones division as well, which is why that deal included some heavy clauses on Nokia not patent trolling. Apparently no such clause or insufficient clauses were included for Sony-Eriksson buyout deal.

    10. Re:Translation... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      In other words that's billions in phoney baloney market expectation of what Ericsson is worth. The same market which said WhatsApp and Facebook were worth what?

    11. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignoring the highest court of a country you are operating in is never a good idea, regardless of whether you believe the case has merit or not. In fact, the ruling was not against Xiaomi because they have done something wrong, but because they didn't appear in court, which is just plain stupid.

    12. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Guess it's unmannerly to call you stupid.
      So I'll call you yellow instead.

      No yellow.

      Ericsson has a business where they make money.
      Some of the money will reach to the owners of the company.

      As such people are interested in owning the company to get hold of that money. And because of that to get ownership of a part of the company cost money.

      P/E for for Ericsson was 23.25.
      For Apple 17.67.
      For Google 27.16.
      For Nokia 59.84.
      For Facebook 74.47.

      Facebook purchased WhatApp for 16 billion USD. I don't know what people thought it was work but 16 billion isn't something I would sneeze at.

      As for Facebook valuation you can say what you want.
      But the reality is that they ARE making money. And they are increasing the amounts they make quickly.

      I don't know how much you've actually looked into it. Guess you may make your statement out of the IPO relative what the stock traded at later.

      IPO price of Facebook was $38 18 May 2012.
      In August 2012 it traded at around $18.
      Mid July 2013 at $26.
      And then it lifted to $54 in mid October 2013 and to $70 early march 2014.

      Currently (15 min delay?) valued at $78.45 with a recent peak just above $80.

      It was priced very high relative profits and yeah it did fall from $38 to $18. But it's up at $78 now at a better price relative their currents profits. So profits will have risen a lot over these 2.5 years.

      You're free to argue it should be worth nothing. But considering they make billions that would be pretty stupid and I for sure would take a chunk of Facebook if it was given to me for free. (Currently valued at 216.79 billion.)

    13. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Ericsson is 138 years old.

      1876 They started with telegraphs.
      1877 Showed of the telephone.
      1878 Started repairing telephones.
      1881 Started making telephone equipment.
      1882 Made a wall-mounted telephone.
      1896 They produced over 25 000 telephones.
      1907 They started to produce telephones in New York.
      1909 Set up telephone station in Mexico.
      1918 Merged with SAT.
      1923 Televerket pick their 500 switch.
      1932 Kreuger buys a controlling stake of Ericsson and sell it to biggest competitor ITT.
      1946 They start some funds.
      1950 They start going international.
      1956 They make their first mobile phone!! And a phone where everything is in the handle.
      1970 Ericsson and Televerket join each other in developing switching equipment.
      1976 AXE station.
      1977 Computer controlled AXE.
      1978 Ericsson and Philips receives a large order from Saudi Arabia.
      1982 Ericsson Information Systems was launched and their PC.
      1992 World leader in mobile phones with over 100 000 employees.
      1996 Radio communication large share of their business area, mobile system and telephones grow by 50 percent.
      2000 Ericsson response - Emergency assistance.
      2001 Cell division merge with Sony.
      2003 Returns to profits.
      2006 "Ericsson received the Best Access Technology recognition for its VDSL2 solution for fixed broadband access at the Broad World Forum."

      Why should the company be free?

    14. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile the history of Xiaomi:

      2010 Founded, make custom Android ROM.
      2011 Launches a phone.

      Sell phones, smart TVs, routers and is looking to launch a tablet.

      So.. Chances are Ericsson have innovated more over the years and spent more on R&D and made more money and ..

    15. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      How are they trolling?

      Swedish companies spend a lot on R&D.

      We innovate a lot. The companies innovate a lot.

      Sure they charge for their innovations. So what?

      You're free to spend billions in R&D too.

    16. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      My other post:

      How are they trolling?
      Swedish companies spend a lot on R&D.
      We innovate a lot. The companies innovate a lot.
      Sure they charge for their innovations. So what?
      You're free to spend billions in R&D too.

      R&D % of GDP PPP:
      (Not all countries in the world - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...)

      #1 South Korea 4.36%
      #2 Israel 3.93%
      #3 Japan 3.67%
      #4 Sweden 3.3%
      #5 Finland 3.1%
      #6 USA 2.7%
      #7 Austria 2.5%
      #8 Denmark 2.4%
      #9 Switzerland 2.3%
      #10 Iceland 2.3%
      #11 Germany 2.3%
      #12 Taiwan 2.3%
      #13 Singapore 2.2%
      #14 China 1.97%

      Saudi Arabia 0.25%
      Etiopia 0.17%
      Indonesia 0.07% .. so in case you wonder why the world is as it is with successful tech companies .. Maybe the amount of money they pour into R&D relate somewhat to that ...

    17. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Patent trolling refers to non-producing entity going after producing entities, shielded by the fact that they have no manufacturing so no danger of counter-suit.

    18. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL
      Somebody mod this guy up for sheer useless effort.
      Going completely off a tangent with national R&D/GDP PPP, corporate valuation, history...instead of examining the ACTUAL case under scrutiny.
      Listen dude, you may actually do some good, if you actually had a brain.

    19. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I know?

      But Ericsson has been or is a market leader in mobile phone equipment and has researched, spent and made developments as one.

      Xiaomi is more or less irrelevant.

    20. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Regardless of what have happened Ericsson have developed both the equipment and technology.

      Xiaomi have used it without paying.

      What is there to be upset about?

    21. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Nokia was even more of that. In spite of it, Nokia and Microsoft had to make significant promises to Chinese, Indian and Korean authorities at least (and likely EU and US authorities as well) that Nokia would not patent troll other companies after sale of mobile phones division to Microsoft.

    22. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

      For both I guess.

      Though the other I guess I can easily search for.

      "particular, Chinese regulators are concerned Microsoft could use its patents to gain an edge in the local market. Over 80 percent of Chinese smartphones run Android, which Microsoft claims contains certain technologies on which it holds patents."
      "In cases involving less important patents, Microsoft can seek a product ban if the vendor conducted "negotiations not in good faith," according to the ministry. Microsoft's promise on fundamental patents will last indefinitely; the promise on non-fundamental patents for eight years."

      Concerns Microsoft and not Nokia.

      And I guess it make some sense considering the position Nokias mobile phones where in relative where they were on the patents front.

      Also it was something China asked for to accept it. I don't know to what extent they can enforce that but I guess there was a situation of accepting that or not. Not given Chinese companies would just be able to use it for nothing and not risk anything.

    23. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      + otherwise.

      As in if they wasn't depending on Chinese decision on the matter. And didn't made such a deal.

    24. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      No, concerns Nokia. Not sure about the source you used that would claim otherwise, as it was very widely known and posted even here on slashdot that MS didn't actually get the patents with purchase, but license to use patents. Most of relevant patents stayed with Nokia.

      And yes, they did depend on Chinese. You cannot buy a unit with significant presence in China without getting acceptance from pro-competition parts of bureaucracy. Same goes for other large countries. The deals made are usually agreements with said agencies that enable company to conduct business that would otherwise cause rejection of deals.

    25. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Anyway. If Ericsson can sue successfully for it I would take that as them being able to and not having signed such a deal.

      Both Ericsson and Nokia have real innovations, have made real products, have spend billions (?) in R&D and so on.

    26. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regardless of what have happened Ericsson have developed both the equipment and technology.

      Xiaomi have used it without paying.

      What is there to be upset about?

      To quote you a little earlier "citation needed".
      All I see so far is he-said/she-said.
      There are no technical details, certainly not from your totally bogus cut-and-paste effort.
      Of course we all know that the patent system is completely water tight, incorruptible system, with no possibility of abuse or trolling; especially in a third world shithole country like India.

      For lack of details, I have no idea who is in the right here...I suggest you have even less.

    27. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Which is irrelevant to the topic at hand, as a lot of patent trolls spend a large amount of money either researching or buying necessary patents.

      And as noted, Eriksson that spent "billions on R&D" and Eriksson that you have today are two different companies that merely share the same name. Eriksson that actually did the development is known today as "Sony". Just like the unit that developed Nokia phones is now known as "Microsoft".

    28. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Source?

      I don't know what the deal was at either time, saw nothing in the merge part at first (that was a 50/50% thing.)

      When Sony bought out Ericsson from that they paid little over 1 billion for Ericsson 50% share part, they cross-licensed their patents and Sony got _FIVE_ crucial patents.

      Ericsson still do radio communications / mobile phone network equipment. They likely still hold a bunch of mobile phone patents and chances are they have got new ones / the research and developments carries into phones to and not just the telephone company owned network part. Phones and the fixed antennas need to be able to communicate with each other.

      Not that I know the details but I assume they are irrelevant when it comes to phone patents. ... especially since they went after Xiaomi for them ..

    29. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      http://techmoran.com/will-huaw...
      4 July 2013:
      "Li Yingtao, the head of Huaweiâ(TM)s R&D has said that Huawei is in the plan to increase its investment on R&D and could outspend Swedish Ericsson, which is the worldâ(TM)s largest telecom equipment seller, this year."

      "The company spent US$4.9 billion in 2012 on research and development, but it is looking to increase that in order to convince customers that it isnâ(TM)t just a vendor that competes on price, but also on quality."

      "In terms of a percentage of revenues, Ericsson spent 14.4% of its revenues on research, compared to 13.7% by Huawei."

      So likely over $5 billion for each company for just 2013?

    30. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Source: anyone who actually follows the industry. Eriksson has been one of the leaders of mobile networking gear since the times of NMT. It has also been the leading phone manufacturer back in the days of NMT and GSM.

      It hasn't been a major phone manufacturer since early 2000s however, when its mobile phone unit got crushed by Nokia. That's why they had to do the join venture with Sony.

      When that mostly fell through, they sold the unit to Sony, while getting to keep most of the patents and licensing them to the Sony's mobile phone division. This is EXACTLY what happened to Nokia and Microsoft - Nokia kept most of the patents and licensed them to Microsoft.

      The reason why this deal is so good is because buying company saves a lot of money on not purchasing the patents but getting to use them. Meanwhile selling company gets to go very aggressive on mobile phone patent violation claims because it no longer has a phone production unit that needs to be shielded from counter suits.

      That is why when Nokia-Microsoft deal started to be made, a lot of regulators sought assurances that Nokia wouldn't go full patent troll with its mobile phone related patents after it has no phone manufacturing business of its own to risk.

    31. Re:Translation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Do you even understand that you're talking about building mobile networks, while the story talks about patent fight over mobile phones?

      These are two separate businesses with their own mostly separate patent pools, R&D and production units and so on. All the relevant old time giants - Nokia, Eriksson, Motorola etc all had separate units for networks and phones because of this.

      You seem to keep confusing the two because they are both about "mobile". In reality, two businesses have about as much commonality as supercomputers and embedded systems do. Almost none. Even their common factor, usage of airwaves produces two completely different problems. Base station needs to be able to hear very faint signal coming from mobile phone far away and can push a lot of power to transmitter to send and has extremely complex antennas doing the beam forming to ensure best coverage, while mobile phone needs to minimize energy on both sending and receiving data as well as be good at receiving signal with small omnidirectional antenna in any position.

    32. Re:Translation... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I make the assumption the phones communicate with the base stations and that there's standards and common ideas developed for the two.

      And just because Ericsson don't make any phones any longer they don't necessarily have abandoned developing the technologies / hardware for the purpose (not that I know they do so, well, except their ARM chips.)

  2. Re:Whatever... by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

    Calls come in and calls go out.

    You can't explain that!

    --
    .: Semper Absurda :.
  3. Someone stealing IP from the Indians? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is this bizzaro world? I mean the chinese and koreans are worse but the Indians are trying pretty hard in the copy olympics.

  4. Indian judges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indian judges themselves lack comprehensive knowledge on technologies and patents. I think there is some bribery in action. With the new right-wing party in rule, corporates are taking advantage of the corrupt nation for their own gain!

  5. The new Indian Government is pro-IP rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The new Indian Government that was voted in to power in May of 2014 is pro-IP and has supported the IP rights of the corporates in some of its recent decisions.
    Unlike the previous government that revoked the patent of some of the essential drugs (links - http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/11/02/india-roche-patent-pharma-idINDEE8A109820121102 , http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/03/04/us-india-bayer-idUSBRE9230LC20130304 ), it deregulated the prices of some of the essential drugs for treating serious health conditions such as AIDS, Cancer and diabetes. This is the link for that - http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-cancer-drug-price-goes-up-from-rs-8000-to-rs-108-lakh-2022667

  6. Normally, I'd figure by sabbede · · Score: 1

    that Ericsson was just trolling, but Chinese companies aren't exactly known for respecting IP.

  7. Got a couple Xiaomi phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool design,

    good build quality,
    Powerful hardware,
    Poor electronic implementation.