Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 14, 2013, 11:33 AM   #51
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
The amount of patents Motorola has that are not FRAND are astronomical. Google now has a huge arsenal for decades on things that have never been implemented yet.
They haven't been able to use it to negotiate was the point because most of it is FRAND, or older cell IP.
TMay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 01:18 PM   #52
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMay View Post
They haven't been able to use it to negotiate was the point because most of it is FRAND, or older cell IP.
I'm not following you then. My point is this. Motorola has thousands of patents related to cell phones and cell technologies. Only a FRACTION of those are Frand. Now if you're saying the "important" ones to the recent case(s) aren't particularly valuable - I would agree based on the rulings.

If you're suggesting that most of Motorola's patents aren't of value or "old" - then you're 100% wrong.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 01:29 PM   #53
nevir
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bikes View Post
Wouldn`t this push authors towards publishing their own books with software such as ibooks author and others? Is this option not profitable for the authors?
Some authors have done that pretty successfully on Amazon's platform; but many tend to gravitate to larger publishers as the author will get some money up front, and advertising is covered.
nevir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 01:33 PM   #54
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I'm not following you then. My point is this. Motorola has thousands of patents related to cell phones and cell technologies. Only a FRACTION of those are Frand. Now if you're saying the "important" ones to the recent case(s) aren't particularly valuable - I would agree based on the rulings.

If you're suggesting that most of Motorola's patents aren't of value or "old" - then you're 100% wrong.
Why else would Google have bought them if not for defensive reasons in patent spats? That part of the purchase has been a failure. The patents have some value within Motorola, but Samsung isn't going to give Motorola any space to survive, with or without Nexus branding. For that matter, none of the Android OEM's are going to be allowed room in the market without bloodshed.

Samsung's margins are getting hammered by overproduction at this point in time, and still marketshare is all that matters.

There is quite a bit of analysis on the web that is negative on the benefit to Google of the Motorola buy, and little positive.

I welcome any of that which you provide which supports Motorola a as good "buy", but I expect you will find plenty that refutes that.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevir View Post
Some authors have done that pretty successfully on Amazon's platform; but many tend to gravitate to larger publishers as the author will get some money up front, and advertising is covered.
The iBook Author platform is similar. The Agency Model, even the 70-30 split is ideal for self published Authors, on any platform.
TMay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 02:12 PM   #55
lolkthxbai
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
[QUOTE=nevir;17424988]They set up a shop that charged higher prices ...and forced every other shop to charge identical prices. No sales allowed, exact same cut, etc.[COLOR="#808080"]

So they're in trouble for trying to level the playing field?
lolkthxbai is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 03:33 PM   #56
Tigger11
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rocket City, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bikes View Post
Wouldn`t this push authors towards publishing their own books with software such as ibooks author and others? Is this option not profitable for the authors?
Self publishing is an option, but the funny thing is that self publishing is using the Agency model (at least now). You publish the book (use the tools, generate the electronic book for the 3+ systems on 3 different pieces of software, etc) you set the price then Apple or Amazon or B&N take 30% and you get 70%, ie the same thing that is not going to happen with the books from the big publishers. Amazon will likely return to selling ebooks at much lower then cost and forcing publishers to continue to lower their ebook prices while threatening to remove the print books from their store if they don't meet the new expected prices.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevir View Post

Zero competition on price and margins allowed under the agency model.
Over the last two years the average price of a ebook has gone down, and the over the last two years the number of sources of ebooks has gone up by a huge margin. All that under the Agency model, without the agency model we had one supplier of ebooks and B&N trying to be a second, currently we have the big 3 (Amazon, B&N and Apple) plus lots and lots of little suppliers, that wouldnt have happened under the Amazon owns all the books model we had a few years back.
Tigger11 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 03:54 PM   #57
GadgetDon
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevir View Post

Not sure I agree. Without breaking the agency model, it would be extremely unlikely that Apple lowers the 30% cut; and every other distributor is locked into that same split.

Zero competition on price and margins allowed under the agency model.
The argument is that the "most favored nation" clause required the publishers to switch the other retailers (well, switch Amazon - everyone else has been pretty happy with the agency model) to agency model. With the MFN clause struck down, Apple's retention of the agency model does nothing to force anyone else into it.

I still say the agency model most accurately fits digital goods (it's not like Amazon has to "stock up" on eBooks, taking a risk of overstocking or understocking), but it's pretty clear that Amazon will be allowed to use the "wholesale" model.
GadgetDon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 05:11 PM   #58
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMay View Post
Why else would Google have bought them if not for defensive reasons in patent spats? That part of the purchase has been a failure. The patents have some value within Motorola, but Samsung isn't going to give Motorola any space to survive, with or without Nexus branding. For that matter, none of the Android OEM's are going to be allowed room in the market without bloodshed.

Samsung's margins are getting hammered by overproduction at this point in time, and still marketshare is all that matters.

There is quite a bit of analysis on the web that is negative on the benefit to Google of the Motorola buy, and little positive.

I welcome any of that which you provide which supports Motorola a as good "buy", but I expect you will find plenty that refutes that.

----------



The iBook Author platform is similar. The Agency Model, even the 70-30 split is ideal for self published Authors, on any platform.
I never said whether or not it was a good buy. I merely stated that Motorola has thousands of patents relating to cell technology. I also never commented as to the timing of the purchase.

Having worked in the industry for several years back in the 90s - let me assure you - I'm not conjecturing. Motorola has THOUSANDS of patents. Only a handful were useful in the legal battles so far. That doesn't make the other patents not useful in the future - whether Google implements a fraction of them in future devices or just has them in their back pocket.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 05:21 PM   #59
GadgetDon
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I never said whether or not it was a good buy. I merely stated that Motorola has thousands of patents relating to cell technology. I also never commented as to the timing of the purchase.

Having worked in the industry for several years back in the 90s - let me assure you - I'm not conjecturing. Motorola has THOUSANDS of patents. Only a handful were useful in the legal battles so far. That doesn't make the other patents not useful in the future - whether Google implements a fraction of them in future devices or just has them in their back pocket.
The question I'd ask is how many of them are still relevant to current cell technology (as opposed to, say, better ways of switching between the first gen of cell towers) and particularly how many relate to smartphone design (that is, data processing, not voice).

Thousands of patents covering the industry as it stood in the 90s aren't going to be that relevant moving forward (unless they were core ones which were already relevant now and would have been used in the trials).
GadgetDon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 05:58 PM   #60
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetDon View Post
The question I'd ask is how many of them are still relevant to current cell technology (as opposed to, say, better ways of switching between the first gen of cell towers) and particularly how many relate to smartphone design (that is, data processing, not voice).

Thousands of patents covering the industry as it stood in the 90s aren't going to be that relevant moving forward (unless they were core ones which were already relevant now and would have been used in the trials).
I don't know the specific breakdown - but I was more referring to features, UI elements, etc a phone could have that Motorola has patents for.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 06:02 PM   #61
GadgetDon
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I don't know the specific breakdown - but I was more referring to features, UI elements, etc a phone could have that Motorola has patents for.
But that's my point - assuming that Google will handle its patents in a reasonable way (i.e., no "I have this old patent that at one point sends a message from one computer to another - therefore anyone who does anything sending a message must pay us or else"), I wonder how many are recent enough to be relevant that they could provide that sort of advantage.
GadgetDon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 06:32 PM   #62
nevir
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetDon View Post
The argument is that the "most favored nation" clause required the publishers to switch the other retailers (well, switch Amazon - everyone else has been pretty happy with the agency model) to agency model. With the MFN clause struck down, Apple's retention of the agency model does nothing to force anyone else into it.

I still say the agency model most accurately fits digital goods (it's not like Amazon has to "stock up" on eBooks, taking a risk of overstocking or understocking), but it's pretty clear that Amazon will be allowed to use the "wholesale" model.
Yeah, true, MFN was really the part of that I took issue with
nevir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2013, 09:56 PM   #63
GadgetDon
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevir View Post
Yeah, true, MFN was really the part of that I took issue with
The easy part of the case is the MFN - to the point where, if the DoJ was only saying "Drop the MFN clause and pay a token fine", there's no way that Apple wouldn't have settled because it's one the DoJ could win on.
GadgetDon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 15, 2013, 07:00 AM   #64
Solomani
macrumors 65816
 
Solomani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Well yes. Apple will always need at least one exec who sports a Romulan haircut.
Solomani is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 15, 2013, 12:19 PM   #65
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetDon View Post
The easy part of the case is the MFN - to the point where, if the DoJ was only saying "Drop the MFN clause and pay a token fine", there's no way that Apple wouldn't have settled because it's one the DoJ could win on.
Nothing illegal at all about a MFN clause in a distributor's contract for a product, or even MSRP that serves essentially the same purpose but driven by the manufacturer/producer. Both are to level the sales playing field. I don't think that Apple would have given in on that either.

MFM and the Agency Model are sideshows to a collusion trial though the DOJ prefers removal of those plus financial penalties as the remediation.
TMay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2013, 07:59 AM   #66
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solomani View Post
Well yes. Apple will always need at least one exec who sports a Romulan haircut.
Best post of the thread.
Bubba Satori is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC