5 ms·

Most things needed to make a smartphone is covered by FRAND patents. Software patents are of course a problem for anyone working in the software industry, so th

by gnaffle 13y ago

Most things needed to make a smartphone is covered by FRAND patents. Software patents are of course a problem for anyone working in the software industry, so that's not limited to smartphones.

MatthewPhillips 13y ago
I work in the software industry and have never once worried or even thought about patents in the things I work on. It really depends on what field you work in.
- Kliment 13y ago
  This is only a valid strategy until you have enough money/exposure. Then you get targeted by asshead extortionists and the law is on their side. After the first lawsuit, you will never "never once worry" again.
- bottled_poe 13y ago
  Well that and whether you are making millions from software sales.
e12e 13y ago
"Most things"? Haven't we just learned that if you make a smart phone that looks like a smart phone (rounded rectangle, button below screen) you can (and will) be sued? I suppose the fact that stuff like that is the area where big legal battles are fought, does imply that a lot of the "hard" patents (radio spectrum/coding, noise cancellation, audio encoding etc) are indeed covered by FRAND patents, though. It still seems to be a bit of a leap to go from there to saying that you'd not run into patents when making a smart phone?
- Tuna-Fish 13y ago
  > "Most things"? Haven't we just learned that if you make a smart phone that looks like a smart phone (rounded rectangle, button below screen) you can (and will) be sued? Only if you sell in the markets where such patents matter. Note how Jolla is conspicuously absent from the US.
- _Simon 13y ago
  No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.
  - e12e 13y ago
    I'm not sure what (who?) "people like myself" are referring to, but you are indeed right -- while Apple tried to sue on the basis of what I believe is fair to sum up as "something looking like a smart phone (granted the natural technical progression to larger and better touch screens)" -- they only won an injunction for "something that looks confusingly like an iPhone". I still think that's a rather silly ruling -- and my point was that you could be sued, not that you'd loose (if you had a few million to spare on defending yourself) -- on the basis on a lot of different patent than just the type that are covered by FRAND agreement(s).
    - _Simon 13y ago
      By 'people like you' I mean those that continue to perpetuate the meme in an incorrect and dismissive manor.
  - jon-wood 13y ago
    > To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering. The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.
    - _Simon 13y ago
      >""piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath"" That isn't what the design patent says. It's far more nuanced.
    - 13y ago
PeterisP 13y ago
"Most" is not enough. If you have a single not-FRAND patent for Samsung, one for Apple and one for Nokia that you are allegedly violating (even if you're not), then consider your product dead before arrival.
marcosdumay 13y ago
Yes, there are hundred of thousands of FRAND patents that will cost "only" a small percentage (1%-5%) of the product's selling price to license each. Anyway, no, the patents don't stop you from making a phone for yourself. Nobody will sue you if you do that.

by gnaffle 13y ago

Most things needed to make a smartphone is covered by FRAND patents. Software patents are of course a problem for anyone working in the software industry, so that's not limited to smartphones.

MatthewPhillips 13y ago

I work in the software industry and have never once worried or even thought about patents in the things I work on. It really depends on what field you work in.

Kliment 13y ago
This is only a valid strategy until you have enough money/exposure. Then you get targeted by asshead extortionists and the law is on their side. After the first lawsuit, you will never "never once worry" again.
bottled_poe 13y ago
Well that and whether you are making millions from software sales.

e12e 13y ago

"Most things"? Haven't we just learned that if you make a smart phone that looks like a smart phone (rounded rectangle, button below screen) you can (and will) be sued? I suppose the fact that stuff like that is the area where big legal battles are fought, does imply that a lot of the "hard" patents (radio spectrum/coding, noise cancellation, audio encoding etc) are indeed covered by FRAND patents, though. It still seems to be a bit of a leap to go from there to saying that you'd not run into patents when making a smart phone?

Tuna-Fish 13y ago
> "Most things"? Haven't we just learned that if you make a smart phone that looks like a smart phone (rounded rectangle, button below screen) you can (and will) be sued? Only if you sell in the markets where such patents matter. Note how Jolla is conspicuously absent from the US.
_Simon 13y ago
No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.
- e12e 13y ago
  I'm not sure what (who?) "people like myself" are referring to, but you are indeed right -- while Apple tried to sue on the basis of what I believe is fair to sum up as "something looking like a smart phone (granted the natural technical progression to larger and better touch screens)" -- they only won an injunction for "something that looks confusingly like an iPhone". I still think that's a rather silly ruling -- and my point was that you could be sued, not that you'd loose (if you had a few million to spare on defending yourself) -- on the basis on a lot of different patent than just the type that are covered by FRAND agreement(s).
  - _Simon 13y ago
    By 'people like you' I mean those that continue to perpetuate the meme in an incorrect and dismissive manor.
- jon-wood 13y ago
  > To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering. The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.
  - _Simon 13y ago
    >""piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath"" That isn't what the design patent says. It's far more nuanced.
  - 13y ago

PeterisP 13y ago

"Most" is not enough. If you have a single not-FRAND patent for Samsung, one for Apple and one for Nokia that you are allegedly violating (even if you're not), then consider your product dead before arrival.

marcosdumay 13y ago

Yes, there are hundred of thousands of FRAND patents that will cost "only" a small percentage (1%-5%) of the product's selling price to license each. Anyway, no, the patents don't stop you from making a phone for yourself. Nobody will sue you if you do that.