3 ms·
It isn't the demand for fees, per se, it's the intended result of those fees. Those fees are to be charged at such a rate, a rate practically guaranteed by the
by yock 15y ago
It isn't the demand for fees, per se, it's the intended result of those fees. Those fees are to be charged at such a rate, a rate practically guaranteed by the monopoly promised by the patent, as to make Android infeasible economically. That behavior is at the very heart of anti-competitive law.
- AllenKids 15y agoI don't get it. The fees are always in 5-20 ranges from what can be gathered. Collectively Microsoft, Apple and Oracle would get $40 tops per phone. Why is it economically infeasible? Adding $40 to COGS at about $200 sure is not pretty, but impossible? Also Google is making money off of the platform, let it subsides Android manufacturors if necessary. After all by giving out decent mobile OS for free, Google also makes Microsoft's business model "infeasible economically". Live by the sword, at least expect a few cuts.