Google's Got Microsoft In A Headlock: Pay $4 Billion A Year Or Sto

[123456789A]

Is Motorola charging the same amount to all manufacturers using its patents or are they singling out Microsoft?

If Google/Motorola's thing holds up in court, what's to stop Microsoft from charging Android manufacturers equally outrageous amounts?

[zeke009]

But Microsoft picked this fight with Google. Microsoft has been attacking Android by going after the companies that build devices on it. It has bullied more than a half dozen Android/Linux device makers into paying it royalties on every device they made. Microsoft has reportedly been asking for $5 - $15 per unit (not pennies). Barnes & Noble refused to pay and the two were in court until they settled last week. That settlement keeps Microsoft's Android patent shake-down scheme in tact.

Not siding with either party here, but I have to ask.

Is Android or the OEM's infringing on patents owned by Microsoft? Yes or no question. If yes, how is this a fight and why shouldn't they defend their patents? The same goes for MS, if they are using someone elses work, pay up. But this really seems like retaliation with the mention of FRAND.

If Android is infringing, why isn't Google fixing it? They have MS and Oracle after them and who knows who else is preparing to file, it seems like they have some serious issues to address.

[pwgarner]

Apparently for some people here it's OK to go "one way road". It's ok for Microsoft to take money from Google but not vise verse. I love it.

I don't really see this as vice verse. It feels as if they are taking it a little too far. $4 billion a year is kinda steep for wifi. I thought fair and reasonable meant for everyone, not just the people we are mad at for the moment. These patent things seem to go round and round with the big companies so just like Apple was trying to block devices what happens if now MS does this for Android? We need reform not more payouts.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

Is Motorola charging the same amount to all manufacturers using its patents or are they singling out Microsoft?

If Google/Motorola's thing holds up in court, what's to stop Microsoft from charging Android manufacturers equally outrageous amounts?

AFAIK, it's 2.25% regardless of who the licensee is, which, on a $500 phone handset works out at about ~11 dollars. Not cheap by any means, but not extortionate IMO. Microsoft didn't want to pay, and now things move to the next stage. $4 billion p/a is crazy, but I think with that kind of demand, they're trying to send a message, rather than actually seeking damanges (although given capitalism, I could well be mistaken).

To me, this just looks like a message from the Googleplex that extorting their customers doesn't fly anymore, and now they've got Motorola's patent cache, they're ready to bite back.

EDIT: Maths was hilariously wrong.

Edited May 7, 2012 by Majesticmerc

[ViperAFK]

This insanity has to stop, it really does. The whole thing is just a goddamn mess. Lawsuits over patents hidden behind NDA's, ridiculous licencing terms, patents on standard components, bans on product imports, copyright on lines of code. The whole tech industry is drowning in lawsuits, and the only winners are the lawyers.

Agreed, the whole system is a mess

[DevilsNotDead]

When this was first announced, the Google fans claimed that Google had no part in it, that Google does not yet own Moto because no money has yet changed hands and therefore cannot control what they do. Now you say it is time for Google to get payback, that Google is protecting Android. If that is true, then I guess Google is controlling Moto. So which is it, Google does control Moto, or they do not control Moto.

Either way, I think it is time for Microsoft to start charging $200/device for the patents Android is infringing on. Add to this what Oracle will get since they have won at least part of their patent dispute, Android will become very expensive.

when it was first announced no one was sure if it was google or if it was Moto doing it since there was no approval from US/EU for the deal but now since most have approved and china is the only pending approval we can say for sure its google who is trying to protect Android(Google bought Moto for the patents so it make sense for them to sue MS for it).

also, MS charge only $5-10 to the device manufacturer and the oracle case is nothing since Oracle can charge $200-150k for each patent infringe which comes to max $300k for the 2 patent infringed and that's not going to make android expensive since google pays and not the vendors.

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

Apparently for some people here it's OK to go "one way road". It's ok for Microsoft to take money from Google but not vise verse. I love it.

What the two companies are doing is completely and utterly different.

[webeagle12]

What the two companies are doing is completely and utterly different.

If Microsoft wanted to charge $4 billion dollars from Google, people here would be screaming WOOOHOO.

The whole patient system needs to be thrown in a toilet and s*** on it. :blush:

[pickytech]

I was referring to when when Microsoft was (and still is) litigating against Android handset manufacturers. The manufacturers were forced to sign a NDA before Microsoft would tell them which patents they'd violated. To me, that's beyond insane.

Ah, yes. I agree that that's bogus regardless of the parties involved. The clear intent is to prevent other people/companies from colluding to find prior art, or to otherwise invalidate the patents.

[zeke009]

imo, this whole Motorola/Google suing wouldnt have happened if MS have not started charging Android vendors.

MS was greed imo.

Apple is greedy: http://www.idownload...correct-patent/ (Apple v. Samsung)

HTC is greedy: http://www.reuters.c...E77F38E20110816 (HTC v. Apple)

WiLAN is greedy: http://news.cnet.com...reless-patents/ (WiLAN v. Apple, HTC, Hp, Dell & others)

PanoMap is greedy: http://www.electroni...et.view.patent/ (PanoMap v. Google Maps & Apple)

Potter Voice LLC is greedy: http://www.slashgear...atent-26224810/ (Potter v. Apple & Google Voice Actions)

British Telecom is greedy: http://www.fosspaten...e-over-six.html (BT v. Google/Android)

Saying MS is greedy over defending a patent is just not true. What Google is doing is greedy; they infringe (it seems) and give it away and leave the OEM's to fend for themselves while raking it in.

I found those articles by replacing various names in this search string ***** suing over patent, replace ***** with any name. I don't post this to defend one company over the other, but to point on the lack of reasoning in your post. One entity can defend, but another can't because you don't like them?

I think we're all aware that the patent system is an absolute joke in its current shape and reform would probably more controversial than universal healthcare in the US (among business, not in the public space).

[pickytech]

when it was first announced no one was sure if it was google or if it was Moto doing it since there was no approval from US/EU for the deal but now since most have approved and china is the only pending approval we can say for sure its google who is trying to protect Android(Google bought Moto for the patents so it make sense for them to sue MS for it).

I believe there was a reported clause in the contract for the merger that Moto had to seek Google's approval before any litigation. As a result, this was approved by Google at the beginning.

also, MS charge only $5-10 to the device manufacturer and the oracle case is nothing since Oracle can charge $200-150k for each patent infringe which comes to max $300k for the 2 patent infringed and that's not going to make android expensive since google pays and not the vendors.

It's extremely important to note that Microsoft is charging $5-15 per device. Love it or hate it, that is a far cry from charging $4 billion annually for a license regardless of units sold. Not only is that ridiculous in and of itself, it amounts to Microsoft having to pay $59.52 per Xbox 360 currently ever sold, and then repaying every year for the same Xbox 360s that were already paid for the previous year, or effectively increasing the amount paid per device dramatically (as the next year they will only sell roughly 10-15 million devices, which means $266.67 per device assuming 15 million sold, which is $66.68 more than some of the Xbox 360s currently in stock retail for!). Regardless of how you look at it, that's a far cry from $5-15 per device, and completely destroys all profitability, which clearly shows an abuse of FRAND patents.

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

If Microsoft wanted to charge $4 billion dollars from Google, people here would be screaming WOOOHOO.

The whole patient system needs to be thrown in a toilet and s*** on it. :blush:

I think you have a low opinion of most of our users. I really don't think many people would be cheering for Microsoft if the exact situation were reversed.

[articuno1au]

^ For good reason to be fair >.>

[Alladaskill17]

Seriously. **** Google. Written from google chrome on OS X, ha, but seriously - **** Google.

[webeagle12]

I think you have a low opinion of most of our users. I really don't think many people would be cheering for Microsoft if the exact situation were reversed.

You can think all you want!!! There always will be people who agree and there always people who disagree with Google actions. I wouldn't be on Google side if Microsoft wouldn't be grabbing money from Google. People saying its a different crap when it comes to Microsoft grabbing money, but it's not. It's all about patients. Google fired back at Microsoft, karma is a bitch....

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

You can think all you want!!! There always will be people who agree and there always people who disagree with Google actions. I wouldn't be on Google side if Microsoft wouldn't be grabbing money from Google. People saying its a different crap when it comes to Microsoft grabbing money, but it's not. It's all about patients. Google fired back at Microsoft, karma is a bitch....

Of course there will always be the rabid Microsoft fans, just like there are always the rabid Google fans.

I believe you have a misunderstanding of the type and amounts of patents in question. Microsoft has a number of patents that Android-based devices infringe on, and these patents are essential to the entire operating system. Motorola is suing for H.264 and WiFi codecs that are standards patents, and I believe there's literally only a couple of patents in question -- not an entire portfolio. Motorola isn't requesting exorbitant fees from any other company. So why just Microsoft? It's a manipulative business practice.

If Google were in the same situation as Microsoft, I'd absolutely be siding with them.

[Miuku.]

I think you have a low opinion of most of our users. I really don't think many people would be cheering for Microsoft if the exact situation were reversed.

Some of us have been here for almost 10 years - I think we've learned a thing or two about the users here and what is accepted and what isn't.

If Microsoft does something "evil", it's fine. If Apple or Google does something, it's massive flame war to the n'th.

[xeleraph]

You can think all you want!!! There always will be people who agree and there always people who disagree with Google actions. I wouldn't be on Google side if Microsoft wouldn't be grabbing money from Google. People saying its a different crap when it comes to Microsoft grabbing money, but it's not. It's all about patients. Google fired back at Microsoft, karma is a bitch....

So you're on Google's side because they broke the law by infringing Microsoft's intellectual property, and are now trying to break the law again by seeking to abuse FRAND patents in an attempt to recoup the losses from their punishment?

How does that work?

[BajiRav]

Is Motorola charging the same amount to all manufacturers using its patents or are they singling out Microsoft?

If Google/Motorola's thing holds up in court, what's to stop Microsoft from charging Android manufacturers equally outrageous amounts?

I was wondering about it...if Microsoft loses this, what stops them from increasing EAS royalties or stop licensing EAS to Google altogher? Without EAS for any moto phone or google services. They will go down the toilet faster than they can celebrate this victory.

(Replace EAS with whatever other stuff Microsoft claims patents on)

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

Some of us have been here for almost 10 years - I think we've learned a thing or two about the users here and what is accepted and what isn't.

If Microsoft does something "evil", it's fine. If Apple or Google does something, it's massive flame war to the n'th.

I've been on Neowin for 11 years. I know what the general user base is like -- they'll call Microsoft out if they disagree with them. I don't agree with your categorization of Neowin users even remotely. Our users have no problem calling out Microsoft on any issue they disagree with.

No disrespect, but you guys aren't even explaining your viewpoint, you're just arguing the hypothetical situation of "if the sides were reversed." It's a straw man, basically.

[HawkMan]

Apparently for some people here it's OK to go "one way road". It's ok for Microsoft to take money from Google but not vise verse. I love it.

MS never claimed almost 60$ per device, not even be tenth. Their patents have also not been FRAND patents.

[DevilsNotDead]

Apparently for some people here it's OK to go "one way road". It's ok for Microsoft to take money from Google but not vise verse. I love it.

true... They never fail to amuse me.. also, Moto asked for royalties but instead of negotiating MS took it to court..

so obviously its MS fault... I would like to see MS pay a huge amount to Moto.

Geekwire's Todd Bishop is live tweeting from the Seattle courtroom where the case is being heard today.

He tweets: Bottom line of Motorola's argument: Microsoft should have responded to 2.25% patent royalty demand by negotiating, not filing a U.S. lawsuit. The Motorola lawyer told the judge, "Don't forget they started this, we didn't start this."

[BajiRav]

also, Moto asked for royalties but instead of negotiating MS took it to court..

http://www.geekwire.com/2012/judge-scolds-microsoft-motorola-hubris-patent-case/

But after citing the text from Motorola?s original letter, the judge said, ?You?re telling me that?s an invitation for negotiation? Sounds to me like it?s an ultimatum.?

[DevilsNotDead]

http://www.geekwire....is-patent-case/

Robart also questioned Microsoft?s actions in filing the suit, rather than negotiating. He said, ?What good faith is there in saying, ?You know what, we don?t want to play in your sandbox, we?re going to sue you?? ?

[xeleraph]

Robart also questioned Microsoft?s actions in filing the suit, rather than negotiating. He said, ?What good faith is there in saying, ?You know what, we don?t want to play in your sandbox, we?re going to sue you?? ?

To chide Microsoft for not dealing with Motorola with good faith presumes that Motorola was trying to negotiate with Microsoft at all. As the judge's comment shows, that was hardly the case.