Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 15th Aug 2011 12:04 UTC
Google Okay once again I'm breaking my own one-week time-off from OSNews due to, you know, taking a break and being too busy with other things, but this one is big - very big. Also, only the second time in OSNews history we've used the 'breaking'-tag. Google has just announced it is going to buy Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion (more here). While providing Google with a dedicated mobile phone business, it also gives Google ownership of one of the most valuable mobile technology patent portfolios in existence. Update: Responses from the Android ecosystem are positive. HTC: "We welcome the news of today's acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem." Sony Ericsson & LG: "We welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners."
Permalink for comment 485256
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Desperate but wrong move
by lemur2 on Tue 16th Aug 2011 06:54 UTC in reply to "Desperate but wrong move"
Member since:

Contrary to popular believe, MMI patents are not as powerful as people thought. Most of MMI patents are essential to industry standards, thus government ruled that they must be licensed with FRAND. So basically these patents are weaker than MS or Apple patents, and they can choose not to license their patents! Google want to copy Apple way, i.e. producing integrated hardware-software. But they are using Zune track that was proven as a failure.

In this you assume that Google have an intention to try to sue other parties using these patents.

Your assumption holds no water at all if Google's intention is simply to give everyone a large and safe set of mobile patents to use. This Google could do by putting the MMI patents into a community patent pool, just as Google did with WebM patents. Google could do even better than FRAND, they could license all of the patents completely free of charge (to any member of their CCL patent pool).

Then, when Microsoft or Apple come calling trying to sue any maker of an Android device, that company merely has to say ... "no, our device actually uses the methods licensed via the Google CCL pool patent number xyz. We already have a license for this functionality.".

This would appear to be a very, very clever way to protect any manufacturer wishing to make Android devices from persecution by patent trolls.

Reply Parent Score: 3