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."
Thread beginning with comment 560887
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Comment by shmerl
by TechGeek on Wed 8th May 2013 11:26 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:

Except you have your facts wrong. As we have seen in previous Apple IP lawsuits, like Nokia, Apple didn't come to Motorola and ask to negotiate the rates. They just started using the patents. Motorola had to approach them. And Motorola offered the same rate to start with that they offer everyone, 2.5%.

Now, no one ever ends up paying that amount, its just a starting point. And no one else in the phone industry has had any problems getting a license. Now, Apple and Microsoft enter the scene and all of a sudden there are problems.

Motorola only sues Microsoft after Microsoft sues Motorola over Android. Microsoft has been using the technology for years. That doesn't make Motorola look very aggressive. Motorola sues Apple to get its license fees, which Apple refuses to negotiate on. Even when Apple has clear chances for neutral remediation in IP lawsuits, they chose not to pay up. Yeah, why would Motorola ever have to sue?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[10]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Wed 8th May 2013 11:59 in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:

Both Apple and Microsoft have agreed to take a license at reasonable court determined rates, why is this not good enough for Motorola?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Comment by shmerl
by jared_wilkes on Wed 8th May 2013 19:05 in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by shmerl"
jared_wilkes Member since:

Likewise, it can be said that Apple's had no problem paying for SEP patents from anyone but Motorola and Samsung. (The minor dispute with Nokia was settled.)

Anyone arguing for negotiation based on cross-licensing is missing the forest for the trees. Implicit in such an argument is that the 2.25% rate is fair. That is, any reductions in that rate are conditioned on other covenants of similar value.

Also, people keep claiming that Motorola always offers this rate and it always ends in a successful negotiation. There is zero evidence of this. Motorola's own testimony as to other parties who are paying a 2.25% rate (Motorola doesn't argue that this is an unfair but only opening negotiation's tactic, they still, to this day, claim it is a fair rate) could only show 4 instances all were fundamentally flawed in that they did in fact bundle in other deals which would inherently value these particular patents at a lesser but unknown rate and/or were only agreed upon in order to end litigation. There is no evidence of Motorola actually agreeing to license these patents at these rates to anyone, before or after negotiation, without factors that cannot weigh on a FRAND negotiation interfering.

Edited 2013-05-08 19:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2