Microsoft-Google FRAND patent trial ends after six days
0. phoneArena 20 Nov 2012, 23:35 posted on
The last day of the Microsoft-Google FRAND patent case was highlighted by an expert witness who testified that Microsoft will earn $94 billion through 2017 from products that use Google's patented wireless technology...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. jroc74 (Posts: 5271; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I didnt realize it included everything MS sold that is supposed to use these patents. I thought it was just phones...
If 2.25% for everything equals 4 billion.....I dont see a problem. IMO the wireless adapter thats no longer sold by MS shouldnt be included in future sales. Dont know about back sales..
Isnt what MS gets from Android manufactures around 2.25%? Now...I wonder does that include tablets too.
I guess the biggest question is: whats reasonable for FRAND patents? Just remember the F doesnt stand for Free....it stands for Fair.
5. AWiseGuy (Posts: 68; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)
Your last sentence is indeed important. In most of the FRAND cases PA has posted, it seems the percentage asked for hovers between 1 and 3%. 2.25 is on the higher end of that, but it doesn't seem unreasonable considering that it's within a typical range, no? Ah well, I'm not a lawyer so I don't know what constitutes "fair" or how fair may change from one case to another.
7. tedkord (Posts: 6798; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
I would think that fair and reasonable would be the same price for the same patents for each licensee. So, if Google's other licensees pay 2.25% or roughly the same, then its fair and reasonable. If they're paying half a percent, its not.
10. tedkord (Posts: 6798; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
BTW, gave you thumbs up for the QR avatar.
11. AWiseGuy (Posts: 68; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)
I agree. Charging the same to anyone who wants to license the same thing is about as fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory as I can think of. Selectively charging more would not be.
Also, thanks, lol. I see too many avatars here that are just pointless brand stuff. Generally, one's position on Android vs. iOS vs. WP vs. anything else comes out pretty quickly in the comments. Why bother making it your avatar? I figured I'd go with something a little more unique.
13. jroc74 (Posts: 5271; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Ok....now I have a question: is 1% for everything 1 million? If not....MS might be asking to pay too lil IMO. I'm no math major....maybe someone can chime in with the answer....lol.
Ok Wolfram Alpha to the rescue!!! 940 million. So....1% would be around 1 billion. MS might be asking to pay too lil.
9. MeoCao (unregistered)
I love Google but I would like the fee will be not as big as Google wants (but certainly not near to wothless as MS claims). The high licensing fee will be passed over to the end users and that's not healthy.
12. thunder18 (Posts: 117; Member since: 06 Aug 2009)
I think if the settlement is large enough, Google should perhaps entice Microsoft to stop suing their hardware partners into licensing agreements because lets face it the licensing fee IS passed over to the end users and that's not healthy.
2. flower99 (banned) (Posts: 54; Member since: 18 Nov 2012)
look what you done apple, you just change the world once again
3. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
make Microsoft pay the same amount he blackmails other manufacturers! Would be fair!
4. pongkie (Posts: 508; Member since: 20 Aug 2011)
I like Samsung vs apple better its much more epic
6. haseebzahid (Posts: 1853; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
thats was a thriller movie that we like to enjoy when getting bored but this one is pretty legit :\ both companies doing it the right way for now
8. someones4 (Posts: 622; Member since: 16 Sep 2012)
Samsung vs Apple=Superman vs Batman
Google vs microsoft=x-men vs magneto