3 ms·

I think the patent law being broken arguement that the article is trying to make is as follows: the consortium that bought nortel's patents didn't do so for th

I think the patent law being broken arguement that the article is trying to make is as follows: the consortium that bought nortel's patents didn't do so for the patents themselves, they did so to prevent google from having the patents. And they didn't want google to not have the patents not because they were afraid of google bringing products to market based on those patents, but because they didn't want google to be able to shield themselves from patent lawsuits.

cube13 15y ago
Nortel has several 4G LTE-related patents in the pool(http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/RIM-Not-Google-May-Benefit-More-from-Nortel-Patents-367853/ http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/RIM-Not-Goog...). Those are HUGELY valuable to Apple, RIM, Sony Ericsson and Nokia. I would be very surprised if none of those companies came out with 4G phones in the next year or so. Getting control of the patents can save them a pretty tremendous amount of money on licensing fees. These were probably the ones that those companies wanted, and the entire reason that the price is so high. They simply could not let Google be the sole owner of the patents, because that would give Google way too much power in the mobile space. Out of all the companies, MS is probably the only one that did it specifically to hurt Google. However, this also could signal that MS is going to make their own WM7 phone.
- jsnell 15y ago
  How exactly would Google owning "several" patents on LTE translate to them being a sole owner of the technology? My understanding is that there are a couple of thousand patents on parts of LTE, with companies like Qualcomm, Nokia or Ericsson controlling hundreds of patents.
  - cube13 15y ago
    Whoops, I meant the patents. Edited to fix my stupidity.
- brudgers 15y ago
  >"MS is probably the only one that did it specifically to hurt Google" Exactly what is the basis for this? As you noted Nokia with whom Microsoft shares some interest would benefit from owning those patents. In addition, Microsoft as owner of Skype now has a substantial interest in patents applying to telephony networks.

cube13 15y ago

Nortel has several 4G LTE-related patents in the pool(http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/RIM-Not-Google-May-Benefit-More-from-Nortel-Patents-367853/ http://mobile.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/RIM-Not-Goog...). Those are HUGELY valuable to Apple, RIM, Sony Ericsson and Nokia. I would be very surprised if none of those companies came out with 4G phones in the next year or so. Getting control of the patents can save them a pretty tremendous amount of money on licensing fees. These were probably the ones that those companies wanted, and the entire reason that the price is so high. They simply could not let Google be the sole owner of the patents, because that would give Google way too much power in the mobile space. Out of all the companies, MS is probably the only one that did it specifically to hurt Google. However, this also could signal that MS is going to make their own WM7 phone.

jsnell 15y ago
How exactly would Google owning "several" patents on LTE translate to them being a sole owner of the technology? My understanding is that there are a couple of thousand patents on parts of LTE, with companies like Qualcomm, Nokia or Ericsson controlling hundreds of patents.
- cube13 15y ago
  Whoops, I meant the patents. Edited to fix my stupidity.
brudgers 15y ago
>"MS is probably the only one that did it specifically to hurt Google" Exactly what is the basis for this? As you noted Nokia with whom Microsoft shares some interest would benefit from owning those patents. In addition, Microsoft as owner of Skype now has a substantial interest in patents applying to telephony networks.