You could be right about push email not being a FRAND patent, though Motorola have been filing suit over a number of patents which are FRAND related, like the 3G patent that had older model iPhones removed from Apple.com in Germany (for a couple of hours).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Ban on Push iCloud Email Upheld in Germany as Fight over 3G Devices Continues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You could be right about push email not being a FRAND patent, though Motorola have been filing suit over a number of patents which are FRAND related, like the 3G patent that had older model iPhones removed from Apple.com in Germany (for a couple of hours).
Moto will be gone in 5 years.
Watch Bruce make the DOJ look like the fool it is in the ebook bologna.
I can't wait to see Eric Holderman bend over.
Apple was sued by Motorola (and Nokia, i think) for failing to pay royalties on WCDMA technology that all UMTS 3G phones use.
Unlike the current litigation, it wasn't a case of Motorola or Nokia trying to stop Apple from selling phones (via injunction) or harm Apple financially (with exorbitant costs). The heart of the matter were 3G patents that every phone manufacturer had to license because the technology was part of the UMTS 3G specification. Motorola and Nokia wanted money that everyone else had agreed to pay, not for Apple to stop selling devices.
Apple did not like the terms of the licensing, so they stalled payment (as in, didn't pay at all). Stalling payment was just a tactic because ultimate payment was inevitable. Motorola and Nokia manufacture ~90% of the cell network infrastructure that UMTS carriers use. It would not be a big stretch to call them co-inventors of 3G. What Apple tried would be exactly like you trying to manufacture a DVD player and not pay royalties to the DVD consortium or owners of the MPEG-2 codec.
The current litigation is different. Apple's lawsuits are aimed at slowing down or stopping the proliferation of hardware running Android, which they see as a direct competitor/threat to iOS. Notice that they have chosen German courts as the battleground and asked for *injunctions* barring the sale of these products, not compensation or licensing agreements. They have also chosen a set of relatively weak patents (bounce back on an image gallery, really?) or the notorious "community design" specifications as a basis for their lawsuits.
They chose Germany because these same suits would not have survived more than 2 rounds anywhere else in the world. Apple can't slow Google down because Google only makes software (and google is damned good at software). Instead, Android's top 3 selling manufacturers (Samsung, Motorola, HTC) are the targets. The fact that Apple hasn't messed with Nokia, HP, or RIM (HP and RIM make tablet too) is a pretty clear indicator as to what their intentions are.
Returning to the topic at hand, Motorola and Samsung and HTC (to varying degrees) are responding as best they can. Samsung is fighting in South Korea because their courts will almost certainly be more friendly to them than to Apple, and Motorola is using their cell phone technology IP to pressure Apple back as best they can.... which is why they asked for an injunction this time instead of offering Apple licensing terms.
You might find it distasteful, but Apple's lawsuits are very much Jobs' legacy of wanting to attack/limit/contain Android even if it only meant slowing it down a little bit in the courts. I repeat, they picked this fight.
I think you missed out an important fact from your post…
A regular FRAND patent royalty = around $0.02 per iPhone sold.
Motorola's demands for their FRAND patent = $15.00 per iPhone sold.
yes... hence the part about trying to get injunctions. the FRAND stuff falls under current litigation.... where everyone is trying to screw each other over instead of cross license or pay fair royalties.
I think maybe you should read my post again.
I think maybe you should read my post again.
Is that the post license agreement demand or the pre license agreement demand? I have a vague recollection from somewhere that Motorola were claiming FRAND only applies to the a negotiated price and that if you infringe on the patents they are not obliged to give you FRAND pricing for your infringement.
Yeah, because if you ban the iPhone here, that wouldn't result in a ******-storm of whining and bitching.
German iPhone user: You don't frighten us, Motorola pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, sons of a silly person! I blow my nose at you, so-called Pah-teent 'Older, you and all your silly Pah-teent lawyurz! [makes taunting gestures at them]
Motorola lawyer: What a strange person.
Motorola CEO: Now, look here, my good man--
German: I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
Motorola lawyer: Is there someone else up there we can talk to?
German: No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
Motorola invented the first cell phone before Apple was even a company. I just thought I would point that out before you accuse them of just being a copy cat company.
