Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2011 21:48 UTC, submitted by glarepate
Legal "In a scene straight out of Bizarro World, Apple's lawyers are crying foul about Samsung and recent Google acquisitions Motorola's allegedly 'anticompetitive' use of patents. Yes, this is the same Apple that has initiated a patent war with these smartphone rivals. And it's the same rival that has tried to remove competing products from the market, rather than agree to negotiate a licensing fee. And it's the same company that patented multi-touch gestures 26 years after they were invented at a research university. And it's the same company that allegedly doctored evidence in European courts to support its lawsuits against Android. Yet in Apple's rose-colored glasses it is Samsung and Motorola who are bullies. Apparently Apple is irate about these companies' countersuits, which rely largely on patents covering wireless communications."
Thread beginning with comment 488331
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

Forget Apple, their the richest company on the planet and can afford to pay or fight (whichever is cheaper).

The issue is that if company A can prohibit company B from using an OPEN STANDARD by asserting an FRAND patent offensively that standard may be commercially unviable.


It's most definitely all about Apple. FRAND does not imply that everyone is treated equally. There is no "equal" in FRAND. There are no requirements for a company to openly state what are the terms of essential patent licensing.
If you think that the terms that MPEG-LA and Thompson Multimedia MP3 publish are FRAND, then you are mistaken. H.264 and MP3 licensing is FRAND+1.

Reply Parent Score: 2

smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

FRAND does not imply that everyone is treated equally.


the ND stands for non-discriminatory
in my book thats the same as equal in this context

Edited 2011-09-03 23:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Non-discriminatory means that you can't say no just because you want to say no. Fair and reasonable is the part that governs compensation.
See the result of Nokia vs Apple - it's definitely not equal to everyone else*, yet non-discriminatory.


* - the biggest indicator that it's not equal to everyone else is the fact that the terms are not public.

Reply Parent Score: 2