4 ms·

Shame you were downvoted for expressing a legitimate point. Microsoft is charging $1 to $5 for I believe only 2 patents (FAT and Calendar event creation). And

Shame you were downvoted for expressing a legitimate point. Microsoft is charging $1 to $5 for I believe only 2 patents (FAT and Calendar event creation). And they in the eyes of the user (based on the research) aren't as 'valuable' as the UI patents. Also Apple was proposing that royalty rate to be lowered by up to 100% in exchange for cross licensing.

bluelu 14y ago
"Also Apple was proposing that royalty rate to be lowered by up to 100% in exchange for cross licensing." Where is your source?
camiller 14y ago
actually Apple offered a "20 percent discount if Samsung agreed to cross-license its patents to Apple" and a further level of discount if "Samsung would stop using Apple’s most proprietary features". http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/new_court_docs_reveal_apples_patent_licensing_royalty_demands/ http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/new_court_docs_reveal...
josephlord 14y ago
Not 100% but 20% - read the presentation. 20% off for cross license. 40% off if OS developer already has a license from Apple (i.e. Microsoft OS). 20% off if not not a touch screen ('Not using proprietary features - specific features to be discussed' - basically not like an iPhone). 20% off if using an Apple Licensed Processor - (I don't know what this would be). So realistically if cross license is assumed the real rate would be $24 for a Galaxy S type product, $12 for a WP7 (I don't think that the calculations on slide 18 are actually correct). As mentioned this was the opening of the negotiation. I don't know the strength of the patent portfolio but IF it really is hard to bring a touchscreen phone to competitive level without those technologies these don't seem ridiculous prices to me. If I were Samsung and assessed the patents as strong I would probably try to negotiate for: 1) Exclusion of lower end phones completely if no relevant patents applied. 2) Contractual commitment to get reduced rates if others get them. 3) Reduced rates or higher cross license discount.

bluelu 14y ago

"Also Apple was proposing that royalty rate to be lowered by up to 100% in exchange for cross licensing." Where is your source?

camiller 14y ago

actually Apple offered a "20 percent discount if Samsung agreed to cross-license its patents to Apple" and a further level of discount if "Samsung would stop using Apple’s most proprietary features". http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/new_court_docs_reveal_apples_patent_licensing_royalty_demands/ http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/new_court_docs_reveal...

josephlord 14y ago

Not 100% but 20% - read the presentation. 20% off for cross license. 40% off if OS developer already has a license from Apple (i.e. Microsoft OS). 20% off if not not a touch screen ('Not using proprietary features - specific features to be discussed' - basically not like an iPhone). 20% off if using an Apple Licensed Processor - (I don't know what this would be). So realistically if cross license is assumed the real rate would be $24 for a Galaxy S type product, $12 for a WP7 (I don't think that the calculations on slide 18 are actually correct). As mentioned this was the opening of the negotiation. I don't know the strength of the patent portfolio but IF it really is hard to bring a touchscreen phone to competitive level without those technologies these don't seem ridiculous prices to me. If I were Samsung and assessed the patents as strong I would probably try to negotiate for: 1) Exclusion of lower end phones completely if no relevant patents applied. 2) Contractual commitment to get reduced rates if others get them. 3) Reduced rates or higher cross license discount.