Nokia enters into patent license agreement with Apple
Apple payments to Nokia settle all litigation and have positive financial impact
Nokia Corporation
Stock exchange release
June 14, 2011 at 08:05 (CET +1)
Espoo, Finland - Nokia announced that it has signed a patent license agreement with Apple. The agreement will result in settlement of all patent litigation between the companies, including the withdrawal by Nokia and Apple of their respective complaints to the US International Trade Commission.
The financial structure of the agreement consists of a one-time payment payable by Apple and on-going royalties to be paid by Apple to Nokia for the term of the agreement. The specific terms of the contract are confidential.
"We are very pleased to have Apple join the growing number of Nokia licensees," said Stephen Elop, president and chief executive officer of Nokia. "This settlement demonstrates Nokia's industry leading patent portfolio and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market."
During the last two decades, Nokia has invested approximately EUR 43 billion in research and development and built one of the wireless industry's strongest and broadest IPR portfolios, with over 10,000 patent families. Nokia is a world leader in the development of handheld device and mobile communications technologies, which is also demonstrated by Nokia's strong patent position.
This agreement is expected to have a positive financial impact on Nokia's recently revised outlook for the second quarter 2011 of around break-even non-IFRS operating margin for Devices & Services.
About Nokia
Nokia is committed to connecting people to what matters to them by combining advanced mobile technology with personalized services. More than 1.3 billion people connect to one another with a Nokia, from our most affordable voice-optimized mobile phones to advanced Internet-connected smartphones sold in virtually every market in the world. Through Ovi (www.ovi.com), people also enjoy access to maps and navigation on mobile, a rapidly expanding applications store, a growing catalog of digital music, free email and more. Nokia's NAVTEQ is a leader in comprehensive digital mapping and navigation services, and Nokia Siemens Networks is one of the leading providers of telecommunications infrastructure hardware, software and professional services globally.
If Nokia was in a strong position to win they would have pushed for damages and that would have been required on them to reveal the damages for full-disclosure.
It's not. Apple got what it wanted. It's now covered by the same patent pool at HTC, Motorola, etc and now Nokia's leverage of RF Patents is done.
Nokia's reference to a positive impact is not impressive. If it were a big impact they would have noted more than the mild language which will reflect in a flat stock trade day.
Pre-Market NASDAQ trade has the stock up a whopping .25. It's at just over $6/share.
When Apple entered the Smartphone market Nokia was > $40 per share. It's now at $6.11 per share.
They are ripe for a spin off which Microsoft wants.
Apple will now expand on the offensive with HTC, Google's Android OS, Motorola and more. This will be fun when all the new IP Apple has been awarded for iOS 5 surfaces.
By the way in pre-market numbers Apple is up $2.60 per share.
Well, we can go on the assumption that they were either telling the truth, or they were lieing out of their ass.
As to which is more probably, we can't know for sure, but we can judge for ourselves by the comments and reactions of the parties involved.
Nokia sued, but made no comments about what they were sueing for, or why.
Apple replied, providing details of why they would contest the lawsuit.
Straightaway I am thinking what have Nokia got to hide. Apple are normally the ones with the closed doors, so why are they prepared to lay out their defense in the open, when Nokia didn't layout their claim.
If you would have read other press besides AppleInsider, you would have seen that Nokia did in fact state quite clearly what they were sueing for (patent infringement with precise patents mentioned) and why (2 years of negotiations with Apple point blank refusing to license on well established F/RAND terms). Also Nokia responded to Apple's claims on Nokia demanding extra and/or cross-licensing as "untrue".
Of course the claims are "he said, she said", but your assumption that because she didn't say means they are somehow lying is wrong in general (shouting in the streets about injustice is actually often a diversionary tactic isn't it?). Your starting point is even more wrong because she actually did say quite a lot.
So what exactly did Nokia not comment on? The exact offers made to Apple? That is usually stuff none discloses.
Nokia sued, but made no comments about what they were sueing for, or why.
Really? Nokia diden't said nothing?
Nokia in the first case sued with TEN patents. This is telling what and why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe
Moving on to today, and terms are agreed. Apple say nothing, which is like there normal operating mode, and Nokia...say nothing. If they had got anything out of this other than the minimum, there would be some sort of comment, surely?
Nokia has reached what they wanted, Apple paying them
That's what Apple said, do you know how much other companies pay and what Apple was asked to pay?
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
It's wll know for whom?
Can you provide thos agreements and the extortion Nokia tried to do to Apple? Thanks
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
The highlighted wording is only used, if no source for the "well known" piece of information is to be found.
And no, appleinsider is not to be considered trustworthy, neither is Apple (all they said about fees should have been assumption, unless apple happened to get insight in licensing terms of 3rd parties ... oh yeah ...) or Nokia.
Appleinsider should be even more biased, than apple's or nokia's marketing respectively.
If it's anything material the upfront will or should appear in the next financials or grouped into one-off charges, unless for some reason it's large enough to require restatement.
Reading around the sites, the one-off could be 1-2% of iPhone revenue to date + recurring 8euro per subsequent.
Don't shoot the messenger. This being a rumour site and all.
If it's anything material the upfront will or should appear in the next financials or grouped into one-off charges, unless for some reason it's large enough to require restatement.
Reading around the sites, the one-off could be 1-2% of iPhone revenue to date + recurring 8euro per subsequent.
Don't shoot the messenger. This being a rumour site and all.
Which would be a BIG deal to me. 1-2% of revenue is what, some amount of hundreds of millions of dollars
Based on the known information I'd say that Nokia reduced their licensing requirements to an agreeable point, not Apple caving under pressure from Nokia.
If Nokia was in a strong position to win they would have pushed for damages and that would have been required on them to reveal the damages for full-disclosure.
Not likely. Given again that these patents MUST be licensed under terms that are Fair Reasonable and Non Discrimatory there would be no damages because there would be no damage once the lump-sum payment of previous license fees was made. Damages in a patent suit would be limited to cases where the patent holder had no intent of ever licensing the technology.
Nokia has reached what they wanted, Apple paying them
There was never a question that Apple would have to pay Nokia something, the question was always the amount - and we don't know the amount, so we've no certainty about who came away with what they want.
Any way you slice it, it's a lot of money to pay out, as well as ongoing technologies that are essential to current and future products, so Apple will have to keep paying as well.
This a real shot in the arm for Nokia, I'm glad to see it. That's two boots to the face for Apple in a week (publisher climbdown), a quick one to the balls could have them on their knees. :-)
Based on the known information I'd say that Nokia reduced their licensing requirements to an agreeable point, not Apple caving under pressure from Nokia.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
That's what Apple said, do you know how much other companies pay and what Apple was asked to pay?
I would believe this as Apple pays licensing fees to others, as others pay them. Companies often try to get more from a perceived rival than from others they aren't as concerned about.
The two problems here is that Nokia is severely weakened, and the case is nearing the first deadline. So both Nokia and apple likely wanted to get this over with, and compromised on their demands. The is happens all the time, so it's not unusual. There's no reason for you to doubt it, as Nokia never denied Apple accusations, as they would have otherwise.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
They are having to eat it.
We don't know that - it's just chatter. We won't know anything concrete until the first set of financials comes and analysts can try to break out how much is being paid. We do know that of the 10 patents that Nokia was using in the case 3 had been dismissed outright and 2 were at risk of dismissal. Perhaps because Apple was covered under the licenses of their suppliers, though that's speculation.
we don't know that - it's just chatter. We won't know anything concrete until the first set of financials comes and analysts can try to break out how much is being paid. We do know that of the 10 patents that nokia was using in the case 3 had been dismissed outright and 2 were at risk of dismissal. Perhaps because apple was covered under the licenses of their suppliers, though that's speculation.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
If the original request for licensing included cross licensing that Apple wouldn't agree to and is no longer part of the deal, even if the percentage paid has remained the same, then Nokia would have been the ones to cave.
Quote:
They are having to eat it.
Repeating something doesn't make it true or a good argument.
Comments
Nokia makes this emphatically clear it's the other way around:
http://press.nokia.com/2011/06/14/no...nt-with-apple/
Nokia enters into patent license agreement with Apple
Apple payments to Nokia settle all litigation and have positive financial impact
Nokia Corporation
Stock exchange release
June 14, 2011 at 08:05 (CET +1)
Espoo, Finland - Nokia announced that it has signed a patent license agreement with Apple. The agreement will result in settlement of all patent litigation between the companies, including the withdrawal by Nokia and Apple of their respective complaints to the US International Trade Commission.
The financial structure of the agreement consists of a one-time payment payable by Apple and on-going royalties to be paid by Apple to Nokia for the term of the agreement. The specific terms of the contract are confidential.
"We are very pleased to have Apple join the growing number of Nokia licensees," said Stephen Elop, president and chief executive officer of Nokia. "This settlement demonstrates Nokia's industry leading patent portfolio and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market."
During the last two decades, Nokia has invested approximately EUR 43 billion in research and development and built one of the wireless industry's strongest and broadest IPR portfolios, with over 10,000 patent families. Nokia is a world leader in the development of handheld device and mobile communications technologies, which is also demonstrated by Nokia's strong patent position.
This agreement is expected to have a positive financial impact on Nokia's recently revised outlook for the second quarter 2011 of around break-even non-IFRS operating margin for Devices & Services.
About Nokia
Nokia is committed to connecting people to what matters to them by combining advanced mobile technology with personalized services. More than 1.3 billion people connect to one another with a Nokia, from our most affordable voice-optimized mobile phones to advanced Internet-connected smartphones sold in virtually every market in the world. Through Ovi (www.ovi.com), people also enjoy access to maps and navigation on mobile, a rapidly expanding applications store, a growing catalog of digital music, free email and more. Nokia's NAVTEQ is a leader in comprehensive digital mapping and navigation services, and Nokia Siemens Networks is one of the leading providers of telecommunications infrastructure hardware, software and professional services globally.
If Nokia was in a strong position to win they would have pushed for damages and that would have been required on them to reveal the damages for full-disclosure.
It's not. Apple got what it wanted. It's now covered by the same patent pool at HTC, Motorola, etc and now Nokia's leverage of RF Patents is done.
Nokia's reference to a positive impact is not impressive. If it were a big impact they would have noted more than the mild language which will reflect in a flat stock trade day.
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:NOK
Pre-Market NASDAQ trade has the stock up a whopping .25. It's at just over $6/share.
When Apple entered the Smartphone market Nokia was > $40 per share. It's now at $6.11 per share.
They are ripe for a spin off which Microsoft wants.
Apple will now expand on the offensive with HTC, Google's Android OS, Motorola and more. This will be fun when all the new IP Apple has been awarded for iOS 5 surfaces.
By the way in pre-market numbers Apple is up $2.60 per share.
Well, we can go on the assumption that they were either telling the truth, or they were lieing out of their ass.
As to which is more probably, we can't know for sure, but we can judge for ourselves by the comments and reactions of the parties involved.
Nokia sued, but made no comments about what they were sueing for, or why.
Apple replied, providing details of why they would contest the lawsuit.
Straightaway I am thinking what have Nokia got to hide. Apple are normally the ones with the closed doors, so why are they prepared to lay out their defense in the open, when Nokia didn't layout their claim.
If you would have read other press besides AppleInsider, you would have seen that Nokia did in fact state quite clearly what they were sueing for (patent infringement with precise patents mentioned) and why (2 years of negotiations with Apple point blank refusing to license on well established F/RAND terms). Also Nokia responded to Apple's claims on Nokia demanding extra and/or cross-licensing as "untrue".
Of course the claims are "he said, she said", but your assumption that because she didn't say means they are somehow lying is wrong in general (shouting in the streets about injustice is actually often a diversionary tactic isn't it?). Your starting point is even more wrong because she actually did say quite a lot.
So what exactly did Nokia not comment on? The exact offers made to Apple? That is usually stuff none discloses.
Regs, Jarkko
Nokia sued, but made no comments about what they were sueing for, or why.
Really? Nokia diden't said nothing?
Nokia in the first case sued with TEN patents. This is telling what and why.
Moving on to today, and terms are agreed. Apple say nothing, which is like there normal operating mode, and Nokia...say nothing. If they had got anything out of this other than the minimum, there would be some sort of comment, surely?
Nokia has reached what they wanted, Apple paying them
Pre-Market NASDAQ trade has the stock up a whopping .25. It's at just over $6/share.
or 3.5%
By the way in pre-market numbers Apple is up $2.60 per share.
or 1%
That's what Apple said, do you know how much other companies pay and what Apple was asked to pay?
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
It's wll know for whom?
Can you provide thos agreements and the extortion Nokia tried to do to Apple? Thanks
And more bolstering of Florian Mueller? Really?
Nilay Patel's work was so much better:
http://thisismynext.com/2011/06/14/n...-license-fees/
Wake up Gwydion and try to keep up. It is well known and documented that this is the case. Nokia attempted to extort money from Apple outside the terms with other handset makers which was also in violation of their own agreements to provide equal access and terms.
The highlighted wording is only used, if no source for the "well known" piece of information is to be found.
And no, appleinsider is not to be considered trustworthy, neither is Apple (all they said about fees should have been assumption, unless apple happened to get insight in licensing terms of 3rd parties ... oh yeah ...) or Nokia.
Appleinsider should be even more biased, than apple's or nokia's marketing respectively.
Reading around the sites, the one-off could be 1-2% of iPhone revenue to date + recurring 8euro per subsequent.
Don't shoot the messenger. This being a rumour site and all.
If it's anything material the upfront will or should appear in the next financials or grouped into one-off charges, unless for some reason it's large enough to require restatement.
Reading around the sites, the one-off could be 1-2% of iPhone revenue to date + recurring 8euro per subsequent.
Don't shoot the messenger. This being a rumour site and all.
Which would be a BIG deal to me. 1-2% of revenue is what, some amount of hundreds of millions of dollars
If Nokia was in a strong position to win they would have pushed for damages and that would have been required on them to reveal the damages for full-disclosure.
Not likely. Given again that these patents MUST be licensed under terms that are Fair Reasonable and Non Discrimatory there would be no damages because there would be no damage once the lump-sum payment of previous license fees was made. Damages in a patent suit would be limited to cases where the patent holder had no intent of ever licensing the technology.
Nokia has reached what they wanted, Apple paying them
There was never a question that Apple would have to pay Nokia something, the question was always the amount - and we don't know the amount, so we've no certainty about who came away with what they want.
This a real shot in the arm for Nokia, I'm glad to see it. That's two boots to the face for Apple in a week (publisher climbdown), a quick one to the balls could have them on their knees. :-)
Based on the known information I'd say that Nokia reduced their licensing requirements to an agreeable point, not Apple caving under pressure from Nokia.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
They are having to eat it.
Why? HTC has licensed Nokia patents
And you know this because...?
That's what Apple said, do you know how much other companies pay and what Apple was asked to pay?
I would believe this as Apple pays licensing fees to others, as others pay them. Companies often try to get more from a perceived rival than from others they aren't as concerned about.
The two problems here is that Nokia is severely weakened, and the case is nearing the first deadline. So both Nokia and apple likely wanted to get this over with, and compromised on their demands. The is happens all the time, so it's not unusual. There's no reason for you to doubt it, as Nokia never denied Apple accusations, as they would have otherwise.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
They are having to eat it.
We don't know that - it's just chatter. We won't know anything concrete until the first set of financials comes and analysts can try to break out how much is being paid. We do know that of the 10 patents that Nokia was using in the case 3 had been dismissed outright and 2 were at risk of dismissal. Perhaps because Apple was covered under the licenses of their suppliers, though that's speculation.
we don't know that - it's just chatter. We won't know anything concrete until the first set of financials comes and analysts can try to break out how much is being paid. We do know that of the 10 patents that nokia was using in the case 3 had been dismissed outright and 2 were at risk of dismissal. Perhaps because apple was covered under the licenses of their suppliers, though that's speculation.
eating it.
The known information all points to a 1 to 2% fee of every ipad, iphone and ipod touch. That's apparently what Nokia asked for under FRAND terms at the start. How is that caving?
If the original request for licensing included cross licensing that Apple wouldn't agree to and is no longer part of the deal, even if the percentage paid has remained the same, then Nokia would have been the ones to cave.
They are having to eat it.
Repeating something doesn't make it true or a good argument.
And you know this because...?
HTC has been making smartphones since 2002. This would have come to court already if HTC wasn't licensing Nokia's GSM/WLAN patents.