|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 01:24 PM EDT |
No, but Motorola has always opened negotiations with that rate as the opening
bid, and in every case prior to this one, the other company has mad a counter
offer and a final price was agreed to through negotiations.
In this case, Microsoft refused to even try to negotiate. Instead they went
crying off to a sympathetic local judge to make the "big bad bully
Motorola" stop picking on them.
Why couldn't Microsoft make a counter offer and negotiate in good faith just as
all of the other companies have done that ended up paying less than Motorola's
opening asking price of 2.25% per device?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 01:45 PM EDT |
Most of those companies probably cross-licensed some of their patents, which can
account for why no one pays the initial rate. If Microsoft wanted a lower rate,
certainly they could cross-license some patents with Motorola? Or is this one
of those "have your cake and eat it too" situations?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: designerfx on Friday, April 26 2013 @ 02:16 PM EDT |
under normal negotiations they should be able to ask for
whatever they want and then negotiate accordingly.
that's why this is so unprecedented - judge is deciding
negotiations for a company.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
