Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Jan 2013 20:04 UTC
Legal "As was widely expected, the Federal Trade Commission announced this morning that it has reached a settlement agreement with Google, bringing the commission's antitrust investigations into the search giant to a close. Two different areas of Google's business were being explored: the way it prioritized search results, and the way that Google had sought injunctions against devices that were thought to have infringed upon standards-essential patents from Motorola." Would have loved to see the FRAND system crumble, though. Let the patent mess explode - to change the system, we need disruption, not appeasement.
Thread beginning with comment 547254
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

FRAND doesn't specify a price, it doesn't even have to be cheap, it just has to be consistent.


Nope. FRAND terms are never consistent. Specifically in the wireless industry. Cross licensing and being a member of a standards body have major impact on "consistent" part.

The rest of the industry has accepted FRAND and plays by the rules.

So far, only Apple hasn't played by it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


Nope. FRAND terms are never consistent. Specifically in the wireless industry. Cross licensing and being a member of a standards body have major impact on "consistent" part.


I think "major" is a gross exaggeration on your part. It varies slightly due to a variety of factors, but it never deviates greatly from the norm.

What Google and Motorola were doing, specifically to Microsoft w.r.t the Xbox 360 was disgusting. They should be deeply ashamed.


So far, only Apple hasn't played by it.


What are you talking about? Apple has plenty of SEPs that it decidedly does not use in an aggressive manner.

Edited 2013-01-04 14:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

What are you talking about? Apple has plenty of SEPs that it decidedly does not use in an aggressive manner.


He's referring to the common act of cross-licensing. Cross-licensing was the norm in the industry, but Apple refused to play ball - see the Nokia case, see the Samsung case. Apple doesn't want to cross-license, so Nokia and Samsung raised their prices.

I still don't see what's wrong about that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

I think "major" is a gross exaggeration on your part.

My "major" comes from knowledge of working in the industry for the last 7 years. And yes, it is major.

What are you talking about? Apple has plenty of SEPs that it decidedly does not use in an aggressive manner.

By "playing by the rules" I mean that Apple has been the biggest new player to say no so normal terms, like wide cross-licensing. And cross-licensing is very common in the wireless industry.

Reply Parent Score: 2