Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Oct 2012 13:36 UTC
Legal "One of the exhibits Samsung has now made public tells an interesting tale. It's the slide presentation that Apple showed Samsung when it first tried (and failed) to get Samsung to license Apple's patents prior to the start of litigation. While some of the numbers were earlier reported on when the exhibit was used at trial, the slides themselves provide more data - specifically on the difference between what Apple wanted Samsung to pay for Windows phones and for Android phones. The slides punch huge holes in Apple's FRAND arguments. Apple and Microsoft complain to regulators about FRAND rates being excessive and oppressive at approximately $6 per unit, or 2.4%; but the Apple offer was not only at a much higher rate, it targeted Android in a way that seems deliberately designed to destroy its ability to compete in the marketplace." Eagerly awaiting the 45 paragraph comment explaining how this is completely fair and not hypocritical at all. Bonus points if it includes something about Eric Schmidt being on Apple's board, and, double bonus point if it mentions one of the QWERTY Android prototypes. Mega Epic Bonus if it somehow manages to draw a line from Edison, Tesla, to Jobs.
Thread beginning with comment 539527
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Dubious argument
by flypig on Mon 22nd Oct 2012 15:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Dubious argument"
flypig
Member since:
2005-07-13

First, That was not the suggestion at all. Second, Google isn't doing anything anticompetitive against other map makers, at least not in the same way Apple and Microsoft are.


Apologies if I misread the article. My understanding of the accusation is that Google have been using their dominance in search to unfairly promote their other products. Whether or not Google's other products are better is surely independent of whether Google have "cooked anything" in their search results?

If Google's services are getting promoted due to an impartial algorithm because they happen to be the best services, then I'd hope an investigation would vindicate them.

By the way, I'm not accusing Google of doing anything anticompetitive, and I'm not saying the accusations aren't themselves business-motivated. I really wouldn't know!

Reply Parent Score: 2