5 ms·

Google Wants $1.7 Billion from 'unfair' iPhone Royalties

28 points by hoi 15y ago

hoi 15y ago
I updated it to include the relative shares of the patent pool for LTE to give a better perspective comparing the amounts they ask for compared to Qualcomm.
Bockit 15y ago
Does anyone have any thoughts on if making patents non-transferrable would help the current patent situation? I'll admit I have barely begun to think about the implications so it may be dumb from the outset but I think: * No transferring to patent trolls * No situations like the link I haven't really thought about the opposite side of things, was kind of hoping people here would have strong opinions on the matter.
- nkassis 15y ago
  I'm not sure how that could be done. If I understand correctly it's the person with his name on the patent that is allowing these companies to use his patent in anyway they see fit. Their name is still on the patent so it wasn't exactly transferred. Can someone clarify the mechanics of this?
  - markokocic 15y ago
    There is a difference between inventor and assignee. Typically, inventor is a person or group of people that acutally invented something, while assignee is "the owner" of the patent that can use it fro protection, lawsuits, etc. Noone can change inventor, but assignee can sell patent and reassign it to someone else.
    - nkassis 15y ago
      Ah I see how that works now, so it would be possible to make the assignee a one time thing too but in the end what would prevent a "inventor" from assigning the patent to a troll in the first place and some troll create their own patents so that's an issue too. Buying companies for patents would also leave another loophole. This issue isn't simple I guess.
- unlockedphones 15y ago
  Making patents non transferable could result in many a big ideas not getting executed because the inventor does not have the capacity to implement them or is on the way to implement it in a commercially poor way.
  - dan1234 15y ago
    Why would this be so? Surely the inventor could simply licence the patent to a party which does have the capacity to fully the exploit the invention?
bluelu 15y ago
Apple is running a disgusting campaign here in Europe against it's competitors. They even managed to get the European Union to start an anticompetive investigation against Samsung, even though they should be investigated and not their competitors. No wonder Google, Motorola, Samsung fight back. And they should. Apple even managed that the galaxy tab couldn't be sold anymore here for a few weeks and had to be modified. When a trial ordered the same fate to their ipads, they managed to remove the ban (and Motorola even had to make a deposit of 100 Million Euros) in one day while complaining that banning a complete product because of one violating patent wouldn't be fair. Is it "fair" to have a phone/tab banned because it has round corners? They didn't complain there and are still trying to ban all sales of Samsung's Galaxy phones on design patterns or trivial patents.
- nkassis 15y ago
  This is a classic case of you reap what you sow. Hopefully all these companies will one day come to their senses and move against software patents. I'm not holding my breath with Apples 100B in the bank and large numbers from the other players in this fights. Who looses? The little guy like always. At least they are picking on people their own size.
  - bergie 15y ago
    At least they are picking on people their own size. Sure, while at the same time ensuring no new start-ups will ever be brave enough to try and enter the field.
- rbarooah 15y ago
  Presumably you therefore regard Google's actions as equally 'disgusting'.
  - vidarh 15y ago
    Personally I regard them as a suitable response to the way Apple is acting, and I hope more players go after Apple - unfortunately it seems escalation is the only hope of getting things to the point where they might get forced into a truce, since as long as Apple hasn't met any real opposition they've just kept escalating things.

28 points by hoi 15y ago

hoi 15y ago

I updated it to include the relative shares of the patent pool for LTE to give a better perspective comparing the amounts they ask for compared to Qualcomm.

Bockit 15y ago

Does anyone have any thoughts on if making patents non-transferrable would help the current patent situation? I'll admit I have barely begun to think about the implications so it may be dumb from the outset but I think: * No transferring to patent trolls * No situations like the link I haven't really thought about the opposite side of things, was kind of hoping people here would have strong opinions on the matter.

nkassis 15y ago
I'm not sure how that could be done. If I understand correctly it's the person with his name on the patent that is allowing these companies to use his patent in anyway they see fit. Their name is still on the patent so it wasn't exactly transferred. Can someone clarify the mechanics of this?
- markokocic 15y ago
  There is a difference between inventor and assignee. Typically, inventor is a person or group of people that acutally invented something, while assignee is "the owner" of the patent that can use it fro protection, lawsuits, etc. Noone can change inventor, but assignee can sell patent and reassign it to someone else.
  - nkassis 15y ago
    Ah I see how that works now, so it would be possible to make the assignee a one time thing too but in the end what would prevent a "inventor" from assigning the patent to a troll in the first place and some troll create their own patents so that's an issue too. Buying companies for patents would also leave another loophole. This issue isn't simple I guess.
unlockedphones 15y ago
Making patents non transferable could result in many a big ideas not getting executed because the inventor does not have the capacity to implement them or is on the way to implement it in a commercially poor way.
- dan1234 15y ago
  Why would this be so? Surely the inventor could simply licence the patent to a party which does have the capacity to fully the exploit the invention?

bluelu 15y ago

Apple is running a disgusting campaign here in Europe against it's competitors. They even managed to get the European Union to start an anticompetive investigation against Samsung, even though they should be investigated and not their competitors. No wonder Google, Motorola, Samsung fight back. And they should. Apple even managed that the galaxy tab couldn't be sold anymore here for a few weeks and had to be modified. When a trial ordered the same fate to their ipads, they managed to remove the ban (and Motorola even had to make a deposit of 100 Million Euros) in one day while complaining that banning a complete product because of one violating patent wouldn't be fair. Is it "fair" to have a phone/tab banned because it has round corners? They didn't complain there and are still trying to ban all sales of Samsung's Galaxy phones on design patterns or trivial patents.

nkassis 15y ago
This is a classic case of you reap what you sow. Hopefully all these companies will one day come to their senses and move against software patents. I'm not holding my breath with Apples 100B in the bank and large numbers from the other players in this fights. Who looses? The little guy like always. At least they are picking on people their own size.
- bergie 15y ago
  At least they are picking on people their own size. Sure, while at the same time ensuring no new start-ups will ever be brave enough to try and enter the field.
rbarooah 15y ago
Presumably you therefore regard Google's actions as equally 'disgusting'.
- vidarh 15y ago
  Personally I regard them as a suitable response to the way Apple is acting, and I hope more players go after Apple - unfortunately it seems escalation is the only hope of getting things to the point where they might get forced into a truce, since as long as Apple hasn't met any real opposition they've just kept escalating things.