Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 23 2013 @ 11:31 PM EDT |
Nokia is also pursuing a "tethering" patent us 5884190 against
Google & HTC which might fail under prior art. '190's main
claim seems to be that the mobile modem can connect to two
alternative base stations operating in different modes (e.g.
it tries one and if that fails it tries another). I have to
wonder if some ham radio operators hadn't already done this on
AMPRS long before 1995. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMPRNet . [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 24 2013 @ 02:23 AM EDT |
Seen
in the comments:
What are you
talking about? It's Moto who sued Microsoft and guess what? It backfired because
Google was abusing FRAND
patents that need to be licensed under reasonable
terms as they are industry standards.
Microsoft did license them. Under
FRAND, Microsoft currently pays 2c per Windows copy to license the 2300 patents
for H.264 from 29
different companies. That's 0.0008 cents for each
patent.
Motorola was originally asking for 2.25% for their 50 H.264 patents.
That's 45 cents per patent on a $1000 notebook. In other words
Motorola
wanted Microsoft to pay more than 5,100,000% the going rate.
This
is the closest I've seen to comparative numbers which is what the argument
should be about. Do we know any better than this with all
the hiding behind
Trade Secrets?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 24 2013 @ 02:37 AM EDT |
The Reddit crowd seem to be mainly dissecting a post by our friend at
fosspatents on the topic.
Nokia Corporation's Statement
about IPR related to RFC
6386 [datatracker.ietf.org]. If anyone knows how
to sift some sense out of this list the rest of us will be
grateful. The
discussion on the 'net as so often seems to be loudest where the drums are
emptiest, slashdot,
techinvestornews, ...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: dio gratia on Sunday, March 24 2013 @ 02:42 AM EDT |
You've got to wonder whether Nokia has also addressed patent violations with
Google or is the Nokia
Corporation's Statement about IPR all they got?
Having read through
Nokia's U.S. patent claims you could also wonder if Google is doing analysis for
either a preemptive claim against Nokia's patents or even something to do with
dilution by tarnishment.
The question is which side if either will escalate
this first?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|