|
|
|
| Authored by: ukjaybrat on Wednesday, January 30 2013 @ 09:26 AM EST |
Moto gave a commitment to a standards body that
it would offer
FRAND terms in return for having its patents
incorporated into the standard
(despite the fact that the
patents involved are tangential and not required for
anything other than interlaced video).
This is
true
They then tried to hold-up Microsoft for implementing the
standard by demanding 2.5% of the final product price.
This is
false. They opened good-faith negotiations at 2.25%
(not 2.5% for the record).
The more important point here is
that nowhere does it say they "demanded"
anything. It was
Microsoft's duty to make a counter offer (engage in good
faith negotations). Instead they took Moto to court.
Motorola's
inventions are not worth that much and would not
have been included in the
standard.
IF Moto's inventions were not worth much, they
would
not be included in the standard. But they are, and they are.
Deal with
it.
Microsoft have asked the court to hold Moto to it's
commitment
and decide a FRAND rate instead.
No, Microsoft wants to pay
nothing for a patent that others
are paying something for. Nowhere in Moto's
contract does it
say they have to "offer" anything. they have to "negotiate"
a
price. Also, nowhere does it define what a "FRAND rate"
is... Moto thinks it
is 1-2.25%... Microsoft thinks it is 0-
0.1%... it's a difference of opinion and
clearly no one
shares Microsoft's opinion (except Apple) because these
negotiations have gone on for decades without any problem
until MS and Apple
started complaining that these rates are
too high all of a
sudden.
Moto did an end-run around the court and went to Germany
and
tried to get Microsoft's products banned.
Who cares what Moto
did in Germany. it is not germane to
this case.
This is the vital
difference between SEPs (Standards
Essential Patents) and other patents. You
can't help but
implement them, therefore they have to available at
reasonable
rates to all.
I agree with the difference between SEPs and "other
patents." I disagree with the the fact that you think what
Moto did was
unreasonable. They opened negotiations at 2.25%
expecting a counter offer and
instead got sued.
Lastly, you can't say in a previous sentence
"Motorola's
inventions are not worth that much" and in the last sentence
"You
can't help but implement them"... those two things mean
the exact opposite.
Either you can't live without them or
they are not important. You can't have
your cake and eat it
too... pick a side and make an argument.---
IANAL [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
