Nokia to Google: Stop making frivolous complaints

Nokia's fired back at Google, after the latter company filed a complaint against the phone manufacturer and one of its partners, Microsoft, yesterday with the European Commission. The company went so far as to say Google's filing "[wastes] the commission's time and resources on such a frivolous complaint."

Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents deconstructed Nokia's response passage-by-passage, stating the company's response is factually correct. According to Mueller, "Google's allegations are far too vague to give the impression that this is a good use of regulatory resources." Mueller goes on to state that Google may merely be playing a "political game," creating this filing against Nokia and Microsoft with the hopes the commission will investigate Google's claims so it won't appear to be biased against the Internet search giant.

Mueller, who has consulted with Microsoft regarding patent matters such as this, specifically called out Google and Motorola's FRAND patent abuse, saying the company has abused standard-essential patents in cases against Microsoft and Apple. He went on to say that just because Google is being investigated for its patent abuse doesn't mean that every complaint of patent abuse is warranted.

The full text of Nokia's official statement is as follows:

Though we have not yet seen the complaint, Google’s suggestion that Nokia and Microsoft are colluding on intellectual property rights is wrong. Both companies have their own intellectual property portfolios and strategies and operate independently.

Nokia has made regular patent divestments over the last five years. In each case, any commitments made for standards essential patents transfer to the acquirer and existing licenses for the patents continue. Had Google asked us, we would have been happy to confirm this, which could then have avoided them wasting the commission's time and resources on such a frivolous complaint.

We agree with Google that Android devices have significant IP infringement issues, and would welcome constructive efforts to stop unauthorised use of Nokia intellectual property. Nokia has an active licensing program with more than 40 licensees. Companies who are not yet licensed under our standard essential patents should simply approach us and sign up for a license.

In its complaint with the European Commission, Google stated Nokia and Microsoft had transferred 2,000 patents to MOSAID, a company that routinely makes money by requesting patent licensing or seeking litigation from companies that infringe on patents. Both Nokia and Microsoft have stated they were not acting with one another regarding any patent transfers. Mueller noted that Google has transferred its own patents to MOSAID just last year, however.

Sources: Reuters, FOSS Patents, The Verge

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

New Need For Speed Most Wanted to be made by Criterion

Next Story

Samsung: over 50 million Galaxy S I/II smartphones sold

23 Comments

View more comments

Given the way their bedfellows, Microsoft are trying to bully Android manufactures with patent litigation this strikes me as being more than a bit rich.

I guess it's always fun until you're on the receiving end.

Javik said,
Given the way their bedfellows, Microsoft are trying to bully Android manufactures with patent litigation this strikes me as being more than a bit rich.

I guess it's always fun until you're on the receiving end.

They're just protecting their IP. There's ways to license these patents and Google have ignored this process and its finally catching up with them. Nokia have been in the phone game for donkeys years and have licensed their patents (because they've had to because of FRAND) so this whole process is nothing new to them and I highly doubt they have done anything wrong.

I'm guessing they're also worried that Nokia and MS combined could be the first real competition to Android and iOS

DomZ said,

They're just protecting their IP.

So why doesn't Microsoft/Nokia sue Google and Android themselves instead of hiding behind proxies? Or are they afraid of anti-trust scrutiny?

I don't like Oracle much, but at least they are straight up. None of this attack Android manufacturers and weaker companies, forcing them into one sided NDA's, and hiding behind proxy companies. It's just plain underhanded and anti-competitive.

DomZ said,

I'm guessing they're also worried that Nokia and MS combined could be the first real competition to Android and iOS

The only threat Nokia and MS pose to Android is the patents they own. If their products were doing well by themselves there wouldn't be any lawsuits. in fact this only started just before Microsoft released WP7. They had two years to sue and threaten Android OEM's, but not a peep until WP was about to be released. If that's not anti-competitive I don't know what is.

simplezz said,

So why doesn't Microsoft/Nokia sue Google and Android themselves instead of hiding behind proxies? Or are they afraid of anti-trust scrutiny?

Now with Google's purchase of Motorla complete, it no longer is a proxy, Google inhereted that lawsuit as well.

Also, the reason why Microsoft doesn't go after Google is because Google doesn't make money directly from Andriod. The OEMs do, and they chose to use Andriod knowing the risks without any patent protection. Microsoft actually protects OEMs that use their stuff because if the the OEM was to be sued, Microsoft would defend them.

simplezz said,

The only threat Nokia and MS pose to Android is the patents they own. If their products were doing well by themselves there wouldn't be any lawsuits. in fact this only started just before Microsoft released WP7. They had two years to sue and threaten Android OEM's, but not a peep until WP was about to be released. If that's not anti-competitive I don't know what is.

Actually Android's biggest threat is because it is FREE or so that is what we are led to believe. That is called dumping a product onto the market. Google basically said, here is this thing that you can do whatever you want with at no charge. So of course, everyone is going to play with it and see how they can make use of it to cut their costs. The problem is, nothing is truly free, that is the whole purpose of patents! To make sure someone doesn't steal your idea and then give it away.

libertas83 said,

Now with Google's purchase of Motorla complete, it no longer is a proxy, Google inhereted that lawsuit as well.

You misunderstand. By proxies, I'm talking about Microsoft employing patent trolls to do their dirty work for them.

libertas83 said,

Also, the reason why Microsoft doesn't go after Google is because Google doesn't make money directly from Andriod.

Heard of the Nexus line? The one which Google sells itself as well as in store? Oracle sued Google over Android patents and lost. I guess Microsoft is scared of the same thing happening to them. Besides, it's easier picking on the smaller guys I suppose as any Bully knows.

libertas83 said,

The OEMs do, and they chose to use Andriod knowing the risks without any patent protection. Microsoft actually protects OEMs that use their stuff because if the the OEM was to be sued, Microsoft would defend them.

That's what's colloquially known as a protection racket sir.

libertas83 said,

Actually Android's biggest threat is because it is FREE

The threat is to companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Nokia, who are finding it increasingly difficult to compete against free, so they are attempting to raise the effective price of their competitors' products through the abuse of the patent system.

We need patent reform now to stop the patenting of overly generic things by Microsoft, Google and Apple alike and to stop creaking dinosaurs sucking the life out of newer companies as a means of holding on.

thealexweb said,
We need patent reform now to stop the patenting of overly generic things by Microsoft, Google and Apple alike and to stop creaking dinosaurs sucking the life out of newer companies as a means of holding on.

At the same time, start-up culture needs to realize that technology isn't an open library of concepts they can take from to their heart's content. Innovation actually can exist in a universe where IP is protected.

Another problem is, the attitude on the Internet from a lot of slacktivist types is that patents are bad, period, and the whole system should be thrown out and everything should be free and open always. But there's no dealing with children, I suppose.

Joshie said,

At the same time, start-up culture needs to realize that technology isn't an open library of concepts they can take from to their heart's content. Innovation actually can exist in a universe where IP is protected.

Another problem is, the attitude on the Internet from a lot of slacktivist types is that patents are bad, period, and the whole system should be thrown out and everything should be free and open always. But there's no dealing with children, I suppose.


I think that we can all agree that for your patent to be valid you need a product that's for sale (either as a service or a hardware product) for you to claim anything. If you don't have a product then the patent till become invalid. So don't register a patent you don't intend to use. There are companies that are pure patent trolls and the only income they have are licensing income and settlements/lawsuits.
There are also too many patents that are too vague. Some idiot has registered a patent that falls down to "Sending newsletters via e-mail." and there are plenty more of where that came from. Patents like that shouldn't even make it past the first step in the patent office.
The patent system DOES need a big reform that will stop the abuse. If you can't license the patent to your self (like, if someone owned the patent, you would need to get a license [have a product]) then your patent is not valid. So don't register a patent unless you can produce something. Keep it a heavly guarded secret until you have at least a working prototype as a part of the patent. If someone reaches that stage before you then, too bad.

yeah or all this (google vs microsoft), google os vs windows 8,etc is all a setup to turn people away from choosing like a iphone instead of a windows 8 phone,etc...

idk...

all this seems..idk,idc and u dont care what I have to say and you should not.

just enjoy this, everyone should stop been mean and fighting and just enjoy what your doing ..

.air said,
yeah or all this (google vs microsoft), google os vs windows 8,etc is all a setup to turn people away from choosing like a iphone instead of a windows 8 phone,etc...

idk...

all this seems..idk,idc and u dont care what I have to say and you should not.

just enjoy this, everyone should stop been mean and fighting and just enjoy what your doing ..


Wut?

If there was a coherent point there, I'm sure having trouble finding it.

I thought this from Nokia's statement was funny...
"We agree with Google that Android devices have significant IP infringement issues, and would welcome constructive efforts to stop unauthorised use of Nokia intellectual property."

Google seems to be quite hypocritical on this...
"...Google has transferred its own patents to MOSAID just last year, however."

And Google responds to Nokia/Microsoft: "Stop using proxies to do your dirty work."


Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents deconstructed Nokia's response passage-by-passage, stating the company's response is factually correct.

Not this guy again. I wish you'd stop quoting this paid agent of Microsoft. Of course he's going to agree with his corporate paymasters.

simplezz said,

Not this guy again. I wish you'd stop quoting this paid agent of Microsoft. Of course he's going to agree with his corporate paymasters.

When you can't find a way to counter the message, attack the messengers credibility?

simplezz said,
And Google responds to Nokia/Microsoft: "Stop using proxies to do your dirty work."


Not this guy again. I wish you'd stop quoting this paid agent of Microsoft. Of course he's going to agree with his corporate paymasters.


He's one of the leading authorities on patent litigation, especially in regards to technology cases. Almost every reputable technology website on the Internet reporting on cases like this has cited him at one point or another.

Also, Google has worked with MOSAID itself -- just last year, in fact, as I wrote in the article -- if that's what you're referring to when you say proxies.

Anthony Tosie said,

He's one of the leading authorities on patent litigation, especially in regards to technology cases. Almost every reputable technology website on the Internet reporting on cases like this has cited him at one point or another.

He's a patent analyst, not a lawyer, and a biased one at that. All of his posts have an anti-Google rant to them. He's received money from both Microsoft and Oracle. So it's easy to see where his loyalties lie.

Anthony Tosie said,

Also, Google has worked with MOSAID itself -- just last year, in fact, as I wrote in the article -- if that's what you're referring to when you say proxies.

I don't know the details of it. The difference is Microsoft has a history of aggressive patent litigation and funding proxies such as SCO to attack GNU/Linux. So when it and one of its partners start funnelling patents to a third party patent troll, alarm bells start ringing.

simplezz said,

He's a patent analyst, not a lawyer, and a biased one at that. All of his posts have an anti-Google rant to them. He's received money from both Microsoft and Oracle. So it's easy to see where his loyalties lie.


I don't know the details of it. The difference is Microsoft has a history of aggressive patent litigation and funding proxies such as SCO to attack GNU/Linux. So when it and one of its partners start funnelling patents to a third party patent troll, alarm bells start ringing.


So Microsoft's past history matters, but Google's doesn't? I don't follow your logic.

And I never said he was a lawyer. I said he was a leading authority on patent litigation (as my post you quoted said), which he is.

Anthony Tosie said,

So Microsoft's past history matters, but Google's doesn't? I don't follow your logic.

And I never said he was a lawyer. I said he was a leading authority on patent litigation (as my post you quoted said), which he is.


You have to understand. He's going to plug his ears on this sort of thing. It's kind of like how Google fans get when an article quotes, say, Paul Thurrott. The man can sit on a podcast and call Microsoft stupid for hours on end (which he does), but the second he says Android is built on stolen technology, some herpderp chimes up and accuses him of being a Microsoft flunky.

It's a lazy sort of hater attitude that doesn't need justification because people like this don't ever question themselves.

Joshie said,

You have to understand. He's going to plug his ears on this sort of thing. It's kind of like how Google fans get when an article quotes, say, Paul Thurrott. The man can sit on a podcast and call Microsoft stupid for hours on end (which he does), but the second he says Android is built on stolen technology, some herpderp chimes up and accuses him of being a Microsoft flunky.

It's a lazy sort of hater attitude that doesn't need justification because people like this don't ever question themselves.

Please not Thurrott........................ he is just an abetter, a procurer and also vicious and mean; I am sure someone here knows and remember about the "Skeeter affair"................

seeing how it is google who made this crap android OS available to all without getting permissions from the respective companies to use patents contained in android. Now it is starting to hurt the bottom line of the likes of htc, Samsung and others because they are the ones that have to pay for googles none caring nature towards anything. Microsoft has played nice with Motorola for quite some time trying to get them to licence but Motorola ignored it and now google is ignoring it because how in the world can google pay Microsoft a pile of money cause they own Motorola now, this is why it is only now that google complains because now they have to pay for the ****ty os they unloaded.

Commenting is disabled on this article.