|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 12:13 AM EST |
A problem that MS will face is that in some markets its "proven" that
a royalty
rate $2bn is "acceptable" on just a handful of patents. Like in the
mobile
market. How much would the tablet market be worth if there was no wifi? Or if
wifi was just getting around to 54Mbps?
If you take a small number like the retail cost of a MS user license, $300,
multiply it by a small percentage like 1%. Then multiply it by the market size
(100mil?). You get $300mil. Of course a big question is, how many user
licenses of windows are out there? How many XBoxes were sold? What is the
value that the patents brought to those? How do you determine royalties
when MS could volume discount or bundle stuff to minimize royalties and just
sell "support"?
There is a reason for doing negotiations. Large companies are concerned
about this because a little money adds up quickly with high volume and really
so with extraordinary volume. MS put out the total number for PR, it starts
shocking people. How much does MS collect on royalties from Android
manufacturers even though MS had absolutely nothing to do with Android
development and has had issues bringing out Windows Phone OSes? How
much does MS bring in from Windows OS license sales?
Well, we're watching and waiting to see what the court rules and why.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 12:46 AM EST |
I'm not sure that Motorola is avoiding a license.
According to Motorola they made and offer in October 2010, long after Microsoft
started using the technology in question and Microsoft apparently didn't respond
but started filing lawsuits.
It's not entirely clear to me that Motorola's actions were not prompted by an
effort by Microsoft to get Motorola to license it's "utility" patents.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 05:49 AM EST |
Did you read all of Motorola's brief? They
address this point.
It's their standard opening bid. Normally
the other side then makes a counteroffer,
such as their own patents, and then they
work out a deal both can live with.
Microsoft instead tried to get a court to
say that the opening bid itself was a violation
of FRAND obligations.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
