Microsoft and Motorola can't agree on patent payments

A couple of days ago, we reported that as part of their ongoing patent battle, Microsoft and Motorola Mobility wanted to keep some content in their post-trial filings a secret. Now there's word that the public portion of those filings, delivered on Monday, that reveal the two companies still some way apart in terms of what Microsoft should pay Motorola for certain patents.

Back in 2010, Microsoft filed a lawsuit against Motorola, now part of Google, claiming the company was not offering its essential patents for 802.11 WiFi and H.264 video standards under "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms", otherwise known as FRAND. The two companies presented their cases to US District Judge James Robart in a trial in Seattle last month.

Reuters reports that as part of its post-trial filings, Microsoft says it wants to pay just $502,000 a year to use Motorola's H.264 video compression patent, and no more than $736,000 a year for the 802.11 Wi-Fi patent. For its part, Motorola believes it should get a whopping 2.25 percent of the sale price of Microsoft products that use those patents, such as the Xbox 360 and the Windows OS. That could mean that Microsoft would have to pay as much as $125 million a year to Motorola just for the H.264 video standards.

In any case, it is Judge Robart that will make the final decision on what Microsoft should pay Motorola for the use of these patents. That decision is expected to be announced sometime in 2013.

Source: Reuters | Patent image via Shutterstock

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Twitter now has over 200 million active users

Next Story

Microsoft is giving away Kinect Party for free until the end of 2012

10 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Motorola's asking price of an annual $4bn is just way too much for a FRAND patent. That would completely wipe out xbox division's profits..

Given that Microsoft are squeezing nearly $5 a device out of some Android manufacturers the fact that they're trying to get Motorola's patents on the cheap is frankly a joke. Sometimes you reap what you sow.

The logic is flawed. MS have always paid licenses to Motorola for h.264 patents wherein Moto said MS weren't paying enough.

Android on the other hand infinges upon a lot of patents. The fee MS charges is to license their patent portfolio to Android licensees is to protect those companies' investment from future litigation.

Sigh this again...There's a difference.

FAT is not patented under FRAND terms. If you want to use FAT in your devices, you pay w/e Microsoft wants you to pay. Don't like that? Use ext4 or other file systems, it's that simple. You DON'T have to use FAT, its not an industry standard.

h.264 IS licensed under FRAND terms and IS a standard. All the companies who helped create h.264 AGREED to license to each other for dirt cheap (Microsoft pays something like 20 cents to license 1500 patents that are part of h.264). Motorola wants Microsoft to pay $2.25 to license just 5 patents that are part of h.264. That would be fine if it wasn't licensed under FRAND terms, but it is so what Motorola is doing isn't legal.

What's worse is Motorola wants Microsoft to pay for things they don't control. They want $2.25 from Microsoft for a laptop that costs $1000 ($4.50 for one that costs $2000 and so on). MS doesn't control how much a laptop costs and doesn't earn more money from a more expensive laptop, and h.264/802.11 has nothing to do with it either.

Motorola is completely abusing the FRAND licensing. Even Google stated that before they bought them. I guess they are fine with it now.

-Razorfold said,
Sigh this again...There's a difference.
...

Don't bother. Every time there is an article on this, Javik writes the same thing, people try to explain the difference between patents and FRAND patents, how Google charges all companies one price but Microsoft a much, much higher price on something they don't even produce, he wines, sticks his fingers in his ears so he can't hear, then waits for the next article on this. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Don't bother. Every time there is an article on this, Javik writes the same thing, people try to explain the difference between patents and FRAND patents, how Google charges all companies one price but Microsoft a much, much higher price on something they don't even produce, he wines, sticks his fingers in his ears so he can't hear, then waits for the next article on this. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What you're describing is either a troll or a two-dimensional stereotype of a spoiled child.

Joshie said,

What you're describing is either a troll or a two-dimensional stereotype of a spoiled child.

Trolls are spoiled children. Or at least, they act that way.

nohone said,

Don't bother. Every time there is an article on this, Javik writes the same thing, people try to explain the difference between patents and FRAND patents, how Google charges all companies one price but Microsoft a much, much higher price on something they don't even produce, he wines, sticks his fingers in his ears so he can't hear, then waits for the next article on this. Wash, rinse, repeat.


the guy is an idiot, simples