decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
more to the point | 86 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
more to the point
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 10 2013 @ 03:35 PM EDT
Do you think Apple is going to restructure the fees it pays out to developers
that want to sell iPhone apps?

So they are not based on the final selling price ...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

more to the point
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 10 2013 @ 05:44 PM EDT
What excessive demands? Motorola offered Apple and MS the same deal they offer
every business that requests a license for their FRAND patents. Making them the
same offer they make everyone else is by definition fair, reasonable, and
non-discriminatory.

If Apple doesn't want to use cross-licensing to reduce the cost of a license for
Motorola's patents, that is Apple's decision. Many corporations choose to
cross-license as a way to achieve a lower rate. But Apple certainly has no
right to get the lower rate that a cross-licensed patent would get without
offering any of their own patents. That would be discriminatory and unfair - to
every other licensee of Motorola's patents, who could get that rate only after
cross-licensing.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Ah... that old excessive demand fallacy again
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 10 2013 @ 07:45 PM EDT
Moto asks for $2.50 and is willing to negotiate, Apple screams foul, sues, and
says they won't pay more than $1.00.

Meanwhile, Apple wants $4.00 - $6.00 for rounded corners, and Microsoft is
claiming $8.00 and NOT EVEN DISCLOSING WHY!

But Motorola is excessive...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )