Google is thinking about settling FRAND patent dispute with the FTC

Google is thinking about settling FRAND patent dispute with the FTC
According to the Wall Street Journal, Google is considering settling with the FTC over a patent dispute involving FRAND patents. The Mountain View tech titan refused to license industry essential patents to mobile device manufacturers and also used the patents to seek injunctions. The FTC had started investigating Google after the latter purchased Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion as a way to expand its intellectual portfolio. During discussions with the FTC, the agency threatened to bring a case against Google for unfair business practices and discussed a number of cases where Google might have violated FRAND regulations.

Google has not played nicely with its FRAND patents says the FTC

Google has not played nicely with its FRAND patents says the FTC

Google, in response, discussed that a number of its competitors with FRAND patents failed to live up to their obligations and ended up filing suit against Google's wholly owned subsidiary Motorola. Google is worried that if it reaches a settlement over its FRAND patents, its competitors will remain free to take Google to court using their FRAND patents.

The main issue is that Google refused to license these patents even though it is required to accept a fair price to license them to the competition. Instead, Google would seek a court order to ban sales of competitor's products. The FTC is considering bringing action against Google under Section 5 of the FCC Act which covers unfair or deceptive business practices. The Feds argue that Google is using Motorola's patents as a weapon against companies like Microsoft and Apple. if Google settles the dispute, it would put an end to the investigation.

source: WSJ via AppleInsider



1. toiletcleaner

Posts: 224; Member since: Oct 10, 2012

Google is just protecting him self from bullies like apple and Microsoft,


Posts: 4851; Member since: Apr 13, 2012

Lmao. What funny name u have. "Toiletcleaner"

3. lucky_american

Posts: 3; Member since: Oct 17, 2012

Apple is a wolf in lamb disguise Apple is the one need to be punished... not google

4. Hemlocke unregistered

Apple doesn't have any FRAND-encumbered patents at issue in any of its legal proceedings, so that doesn't make much sense. This is an article about FRAND-encumbered patents, or did you just need to let the fanboy flag fly?

10. Aeires unregistered

That's because Apple doesn't believe in FRAND, either offering them or paying for them. Nokia had other plans though.

11. Hemlocke unregistered

Really? So, they were sued over every FRAND patent that they used, and they use quite a few, since the iPhone and iPad debuted? Every mobile company has been taken to task at least once, sometimes many times, over FRAND patents.

12. Aeires unregistered

Hey braniac, they were sued because they were using them without paying for them. Nokia took them to the cleaners because they didn't think they had to pay Nokia for their technology.

5. MorePhonesThanNeeded

Posts: 645; Member since: Oct 23, 2011

"During discussions with the FTC, the agency threatened to bring a case against Google for unfair business practices and discussed a number of cases where Google might have violated FRAND regulations." Someone find the operative word in that sentence, in case you can't it's "might", that in no way means that they did, it's just that the FTC is looking into alleged violations. Not sure how, considering Motorola Mobility was still owned by Motorola when they didn't give licenses for their patents and not just magically Google who only fully acquired MM in march all of a sudden is guilty of not allowing others to gain access to their patents. Such arbitrary stuff coming from the FTC wouldn't you say? If this is true then Google must have some reason for going head to head with the FTC and believe that they will have a chance of succeeding. No one likes to get into losing battles for no reason, I doubt a company as tech savvy and powerful as Google would do that. They are probably doing some serious talking behind closed doors, because this in and of itself just looks like a pretty dumb and stupid move to do by mistake. Google is definitely up to something, and this article is a bit skimpy on interesting bits, but we'll see. While they are at it, could someone please stop the USPTO from granting anymore ambiguous and generalized patents, shapes and things that no one should hold a patent on. Companies who are sitting on patents and are not developing them and are just using them for royalty payments should be forced to turn the patents over to the general public and it become property of the state and or country. Keep these companies from playing court all damn day instead of out there doing some R&D and developing better things.

13. Glim12808

Posts: 394; Member since: Oct 26, 2011

Articles/statements/comments on possible or future or on-going litigations always use words like "might" or "alleged" so don't put too much meaning on it. Also, the article said that Google is "considering settling with the FTC". So it probably means Google thinks it could not win the FRAND case with FTC, which is the opposite of what you are saying.

6. JunkCreek

Posts: 407; Member since: Jul 13, 2012

slide to unlock procedure, bounce-back are should considering FRAND or even not at all, because it is patented the proccess and the result, not code or technical. US somehow was unfair.

7. TechDroid

Posts: 37; Member since: Jun 14, 2011

I think you are missing the point of FRAND. A patent issued under FRAND terms is a so-called standard essential patent, meaning that it is essential to the manufacturing of the device. Whilst I think the slide-to-unlock and the bounce-back patents are stupid, they should not be subject to FRAND terms. That would be ridiculous.

8. JunkCreek

Posts: 407; Member since: Jul 13, 2012

@TechDroid, u missing one thing too my friend, i said "... should considered as FRAND or even nothing at all". so i already thought apple's patent are should considered as FRAND and even not considered at all.

9. MartyK

Posts: 1043; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

"Google also said to FTC lawyers that if it settles the agency's claims, it effectively would be disarmed while competitors continue their abuse, this person said". There you go ALAN, I help you out.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.