3 ms·
Isn't the whole point of FRAND licensing so that companies can't ask for exorbitant amount of fees in licensing for technologies that are required for standards
by X-Istence 14y ago
Isn't the whole point of FRAND licensing so that companies can't ask for exorbitant amount of fees in licensing for technologies that are required for standards defined by various standard bodies.
This reminds me of the Apple v. Motorola lawsuit in which Motorola was attempting to charge more than FRAND for a patent that is related to UMTS networks and is part of the standard. That case got dismissed with prejudice (no re-filing). Samsung seems to be doing the same thing and I wonder if this judge will throw that part out.
- CountSessine 14y agoActually, all of this talk of unscrupulous companies poisoning the standards-bodies wells reminds me of the Rambus case with JEDEC. Rambus applied for a bunch of DRAM patents and then simultaneously kept mum when asked by their JEDEC co-members for a list of relevant patents (which they were required to provide as JEDEC members). JEDEC finalized their standard, everyone started making and selling products, and then Rambus' submarine patents surfaced and everyone was stuck having to pay Rambus license fees. Rambus betrayed JEDEC, their JEDEC co-members, and everyone involved in DRAM standardization and cleverly steered them all right into an iceberg. Somehow what Motorola and Samsung are doing here is morally above this. I guess it's because they're working with Google.
- taligent 14y agoAnd we all know what happened with Rambus. They've spent the last decade in litigation with the FTC/EU. I hope history repeats itself with the Android OEMs and a hard lesson gets sent to everyone that the standards process is sacrosanct.