Apple, Nokia resolve patent dispute with license agreement

24567

Comments

  • asdasdasdasd Posts: 4,395member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    No it wasn't. He implied that Apple's patents were more important than Nokia's, which clearly they are not.



    You inferred that. He said, merely, that Apple did not want to cross licence their IP. Thats all. They were prepared to pay, but not cross-licence.



    I dont know if that is true or not, but it was clear. Your petulant reply was petulant.
  • jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,338member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    You inferred that. He said, merely, that Apple did not want to cross licence their IP. Thats all. They were prepared to pay, but not cross-licence.



    As you were not the person who said it, you can only infer that as well. At the end of the day, Apple is paying Nokia to use their patents.
  • nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,145member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    No it wasn't. He implied that Apple's patents were more important than Nokia's, which clearly they are not.



    Don't put words in my mouth (keyboard?!). My post was clear.
  • jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,338member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post


    Don't put words in my mouth (keyboard?!). My post was clear.



    Was it?
  • msanttimsantti Posts: 1,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins View Post


    Looks like the original* copycats always ends paying to the real innovators. haha!



    *Xerox Alto. Remember it?



    I see Engadget is not the only place you troll.
  • lowededwookielowededwookie Posts: 736member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins View Post


    Looks like the original* copycats always ends paying to the real innovators. haha!



    *Xerox Alto. Remember it?



    Richard Dawkins is an idiot... the real one that is.



    Anyway, It wasn't that Apple wasn't paying licenses to Nokia it was that Nokia was trying to cheat more money out of Apple than everyone else.



    I'm surprised Apple rolled over on this one but then sometimes you have to just give the dying the benefit of the doubt and let them have their final moments.



    Hopefully when they give Nokia phones their 21 gun salute the barrels are aimed at the coffin just to make sure.
  • jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,338member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post


    Anyway, It wasn't that Apple wasn't paying licenses to Nokia it was that Nokia was trying to cheat more money out of Apple than everyone else.



    Provide proof of this claim
  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,039member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post


    Anyway, It wasn't that Apple wasn't paying licenses to Nokia it was that Nokia was trying to cheat more money out of Apple than everyone else.



    And you know this is true because ...
  • stuffestuffe Posts: 390member
    I believe (without spending an inordinate amount of time digging out the original articles) that the problem was the Apple knew that they needed to license these patents from Nokia, but that Nokia were allegedly legally obliged to offer these patents for licensing on an impartial basis (there was a phrase that I cannot bring to mind, "non __something (Began with a c?)__") which they were unwilling to do, instead requiring Apple to cross license their own patents in order to be allowed access to Nokias. This was the argument, that Apple be allowed to license them in the same way as anyone else was able to to without prejudice. Chances are that they have probably agreed to do exactly that, and have dropped the costly handbags at dawn.



    There was never a doubt that Apple would pay, just the matter of on what terms. And it's not a case of Nokia going after Apple, or going after anyone else next, everyone in the mobile industry licenses them from Nokia already, Apple was just the newest without an existing agreement and Nokia tried to strongarm them into paying unfair terms.



    Edit - the term I was looking for was non-discrimitory, and Nokia weren;t after cross licensing, they were after a royalty fee, they just tossed their own patents into question as a bargaining tool - see relpy later
  • allblueallblue Posts: 393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    AppleInsider has reached out to Apple for comment, but has yet to hear back.



    Perhaps you should send some flowers or chocolates or something.
  • bilbo63bilbo63 Posts: 285member
    The right thing to do. Good for both parties in my opinion. Nokia doesn't need the fight, they have enough on their plate. As for Apple, well, if you've used their IP, then you need a license, that's the way it works.
  • stuffestuffe Posts: 390member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    Provide proof of this claim



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post


    And you know this is true because ...



    The below taken from the original article. Apple want to license the Nokia patents on a fair and reasonable non-discrimitary basis, Nokia try to gouge a couple of percent royalty in iPhones as part of the terms:



    "The complaint alleges that these patents are essential to one or more of the GSM, UMTS and 802.11 wireless communication standards, and that the Company has the right to license these patents from plaintiff on fair, reasonable, and non-descriminatory ("FRAND") terms and conditions," Apple said. "Plaintiff seeks unspecified FRAND compensation and other relief. The Company's response to the complaint is not yet due. The Company intends to defend the case vigorously."



    Analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray said he believes that Nokia seeks a 1 percent to 2 percent royalty on every iPhone sold, which would amount to $6 to $12 per phone. Nokia's patents are related to GSM, 3G and Wi-Fi, and cover wireless data, speech coding, security and encryption. Nokia has alleged that all iPhone models released since 2007 infringe on these patents
  • stuffestuffe Posts: 390member
    Duplicate
  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,039member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    The below taken from the original article. Apple want to license the Nokia patents on a fair and reasonable non-discrimitary basis, Nokia try to gouge a couple of percent royalty in iPhones as part of the terms:



    Yes, and this is what Apple said. How do you know this is true?
  • stuffestuffe Posts: 390member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post


    Yes, and this is what Apple said. How do you know this is true?



    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.



    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?



    I can't prove anything, but just the tone of the complaint and the behaviour by both sides suggests to be like a mutual back down, and I would be willing to bet that they have licenses the patents on a FRAND basis without having to pay additional royalties which would be showing up on both companies public accounting books sooner or later.



    If I had a complaint, I would make sure everyone knew what it was, not just sit meekly behind the lawsuit while the defendent made public claims challenging me. Unless I was trying it on as a means to and end. And if I then "won" the argument, even by means out an out of court settlement, I'd be crowing about it.



    So, just common sense really. I don't see why there has to be some mysterious ulterior thing going on.
  • lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member
    Step 2 - design then next iOS devices so that they do NOT use the parts or components etc that are subject to Nokia's patents and then stop making those payments.



    Not sure how difficult that would be but it seems that the legal wrangling may have been partly to get a clear idea of exactly what Nokia's patents covered and what they don't - so that those items can be designed out of Apple products in the future.
  • cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post


    Step 2 - design then next iOS devices so that they do NOT use the parts or components etc that are subject to Nokia's patents and then stop making those payments.



    Not sure how difficult that would be but it seems that the legal wrangling may have been partly to get a clear idea of exactly what Nokia's patents covered and what they don't - so that those items can be designed out of Apple products in the future.



    That would be impossible. Nokia own large chunks of patents that are core to GSM in the way that Qualcomm own chunks of patents that are core to CDMA. Short of Apple inventing an entirely new handset transmission system, which simply isn't a good use of their time, they will continue to pay Nokia for the length of the patents' lives.
  • richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post


    Step 2 - design then next iOS devices so that they do NOT use the parts or components etc that are subject to Nokia's patents and then stop making those payments.



    A phone that can't make phone calls or connect to a wireless network isn't going to sell very well.
  • cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    No it wasn't. He implied that Apple's patents were more important than Nokia's, which clearly they are not.



    There's a fundamental difference between Apple's IP and Nokia's, which is that Nokia's were mostly included into international standards - such as GSM, UMTS, Wi-Fi etc. As a result Nokia is under far greater constraints as to licensing terms than Apple is.



    They have to license their patents under Fair Reasonable and Non Discriminatory terms (FRAND). The legal issue was, what exactly constitutes Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory.



    I suggest reading http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/29/n...epth-analysis/



    TL/DR? We don't know how much Nokia were asking but given that Apple didn't have a large warchest of similar patents that Nokia had to license under FRAND terms it's reasonable to assume they were asking more than Apple wanted to pay. The fact that they have settled so early would seem to indicate that somebody blinked - though as to who is anybody's guess.



    Edit: Given that Apple had managed to have three of the 10 patents excluded already, I'd guess Nokia blinked

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...er-phones.html
  • quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,614member
    Does it really matter?



    This company is circling the drain.



    But hey, they got some patent money. Bravo. \



    They could probably survive on dumb-phone sales alone, or even patent licensing alone, but there's not much to boast about there.
Sign In or Register to comment.