Linked by bowkota on Tue 7th May 2013 21:44 UTC
Legal "The European Commission has accused Motorola Mobility of abusing its standard-essential patents against Apple in Germany. The Commission has sent a Statement of Objections to the company over a misuse of its GPRS patents, which has seen Motorola pursue injunctions against Apple products instead of properly licensing the technology."
Permalink for comment 560883
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Comment by shmerl
by Tony Swash on Wed 8th May 2013 10:39 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by shmerl"
Tony Swash
Member since:

You're STILL skipping over the part where Apple/Microsoft willingly stole Motorola's technology without a license. Just because the licensing talks aren't concluded yet doesn't mean you can just steal the technology!

OK - so the situation is this: Motorola voluntarily offers up some key patents to be licensed in a FRAND framework. This means that the patents become accepted as industry standards and thus become fundamental and essential for the operation of all modern mobile phones. Being part of a FRAND framework means that Motorola has formally committed to always offering licenses, for those patents to anybody who wants them and who is willing to pay, in a fair and non-discriminatory fashion, i.e it will not withhold a license if one is requested and it will not charge a particular licensee more than anybody else is paying just to gain competitive advantage.

Those FRAND commitments (to be fair and non-discriminatory) are precisely what allows any technology owned by one company to become accepted as an industry standard, it is the very basis of the way standards are set, because it insures that once established as a standard the owners of the patents will not abuse their position to seek competitive advantage.

Along comes Apple and it starts making phones that kick Motorola's ass in the market place and it says can we please have a fair and non-discimnatory license so we can pay you a fair and non-discimnatory license fee for using your standard essential patents without which our phones will not work. And Motorola says to Apple 'f--k off, you can't have a license and you must stop using our patented technologies, without which you cannot make a working phone'.

Apple then has a choice. It can stop making phones and call it's lawyers or it could decide to continue to make phones and call it's lawyers. The first option allows the blatant abuse of FRAND by motorola to succeed and option two does not.

And you think Apple is the villain for taking the second option?

Jeez Thome what happened to you, how did your ethical perspective become so warped? Does dislike of Apple trump all other ethical considerations? How can anyone remotely defend what Motorola did?

How can you one day write about the evils of IP and patent law and the wonders of openness and then the next day use weasel words about the evils of technology being stolen to defend an utter abuse of a FRAND standard just because the victim of the abuse is Apple?

Edited 2013-05-08 10:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2