|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 01 2012 @ 03:26 PM EDT |
If, like Apple & MS, you have lots of garbage patents. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 03:18 PM EDT |
By your reasoning, we'd end up in a world where nothing is ever produced.
Moto and Samsung want the base for royalties to be the ASP of a devices.
Moto wants 2.25% while Samsung wants 2.4%. Traditionally demands are
made on % of the component's price using the patents, not the price of the
whole damn widget
If every SEP demanded royalties like these, it wouldn't even take 50 patent
holders of SEP in a $10 chip to demand royalties over the entire selling
price of the device.
By Moto's reasoning, a car with an OnStar like service using Moto's SEP
wireless patents has to pay 2.25% of the sale price of a car. Let's say that
the car cost $50,000. Then Moto believes that it deserves $1,125 from the
car manufacturer that uses a $10 wireless chip with their SEPs.
Let's take this example one step further.....
Now that same $10 wireless chip also uses some Samsung wireless SEPs.
Samsung want 2.4% of the sale price, $50,000, which is $1200.
So now, just 2 of the wireless SEP holders are demanding $2,325 from the
car manufacturer.
What happens when the hundreds of other wireless SEP holders demand
their 2% of the $50,000 car using a $10 wireless chip. The car
manufacturer would have to pay more in royalties than the sale price of the
car.
This is why RAND exists.
Some people's love of "open" blinds them to the realities of the
world.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
