Apple, Nokia resolve patent dispute with license agreement - Page 4

.....

Is that a phone?

So, it's your claim, present them to us. Just some partial quotes will do.

It doesn't have to. The fees don't have to be the same, just comparable. If you read the two articles I posted you would see that these cases pop up often, and Nokia is on one side or the other, depending on whether they are trying to get fees, or are trying to get out of paying fees. All these companies are the same.

Anyway, the end result seems to be what I predicted. Apple is paying somewhere between what Nokia demanded, and what they were expecting to pay, plus the expected back fees.

This is good for both companies, and it's time we let it rest, as it's over.

Oh, well, we know that Android is a crude copy of iOS, because Schmitt himself said it was. Well, he didn't say it was cruder, that's just the opinions of the reviewers and writers who test and use it.

But he did make public statements that at first they were going after the BB. But when Apple announced the iPhone, they changed course and decided to go after them instead. That's why Android looks like a copy of iOS, though over the years, they will naturally diverge.

If they stuck with the BB, then Android phones would look like BB clones instead.

I'm not backtracking on anything. But you keep coming up with untruthful statements, and you have for years. You're so attached to Nokia that you don't know where they end and you start. Keep thinking that way though. We'll wait with baited breath to read what you have to say about their WP7 phones. While you weren't in favor of them now, I'm sure you'll change your tune once you have no choice.

We all remember your tireless defense of Symbian over the years.

They didn't have to, as it was settled, as these things usually are.


We can just go by the legal statements made by Apple and Nokia.


Neither company "won", and neither lost. Both got something between what they wanted. Apple can easily afford the payments, and they never said that they didn't want to pay, just the opposite. And Nokia got some very needed cash, plus the possibility that other large manufacturers who are not paying them will cave in after this dispute.

And they can both get on with their business.

Even if Android is a rip off it has nothing to do with the patents Nokia sued Apple for. They were patents related to GSM and other radio technologies.

So, apart of bashing other OS, what's your point about what the other OP said?

So, there is no proof of Nokia asking less from other manufacturers. Apart that some can pay more than others.



Legal statement where Nokia said it was fair and Apple said it wasn't. So it's not known and there is not proff on any side.



Any proof of other large manufacturers not paying Nokia?

You are meant to be a moderator, why don't you start acting like one.

You constantly make things up, your above post is proof of this. I have told you before, and I will tell you again, I don't use a Nokia phone, and I haven't been using one for quite some time now. I have a work WM6.5 phone, and I hate it, which doesn't give me confidence in WM7, but I have never used 7, so can't comment about it.

Now the reason I defended Symbian is pure and simple, the amount of people on this site making false statements about it is sickening, and all the while we have moderators like you that ignore the false statements and would rather moan at people trying to correct those statements.

Get off your high horse, and stop being so one eyed.

He is acting like one. Moderators on forums aren't expected to embody some platonic idea of a judge, they're just supposed to ban gratuitous trolls like scaramanga (thanks for that whoever banned him) and keep the forum topics roughly on-topic.

Has he unfairly banned you? Deleted your posts? Misused his godlike powers? If not then you're just losing the argument and casting about for an excuse

Figure it out. It won't take much work.

Why don't you start acting like a good member of this community? It seems that those who don't like what I say, and the way I say it, are mostly trolling for the purpose of angering the other users here, You rarely can back up anything you say, and you're a one note band about Nokia. I'm not about to suck up to that, as pretty much everything on that subject you've stated since you've been here has been proven wrong by events. Get used to being mocked. There's nothing wrong with that, like it or not.

We've been saying for years that Symbian is an old, primitive OS that has been forced to accept modern features, and as a result, doesn't work well. We've also said that Nokia should do something about that or they would suffer. We've also said that Apple and Android would catch up and surpass them in numbers of phones sold.

All of this is true, and has come to pass, or is almost there. Apple now sells more smartphones phones in Europe than Nokia. Nokia pulled out of Japan. and one other Asian country, which name I forget. Thev've never been big here, but are doing worse than ever.

Elop pulled a boner, and its killing Nokia.

So what about that is wrong? And which of any of your defenses turned out to be right? Every time I told you their sales were lagging, and that their position in marketshare for smartphones was dropping, all you would respond with is that they're number one. Well, they're not number one any longer, and they wont be number two for too long either. They'll be lucky to be number three.

And if WP7 doesn't take off, and despite IDC and Gartner's predictions, there's no evidence that it will, they may be in trouble that's too late for them to worm out of. Can you prove that to be wrong?

Both possibilities true, but we have to ask ourselves whether it is plausible that both statements are true.

1) Would Apple have withheld royalty payment if they were getting a deal that could be demonstrated to be FRAND? Especially when Apple mentioned in the original suit response they would pay FRAND and intimated they were escrowing funds as a show of their good faith?

If Apple was lying about escrowing funds that would be huge liability, so that's not likely. If FRAND terms were close enough Apple wouldn't have reason to not pay, then say they would pay to the Judge, that doesn't make any sense either. Apple stated Nokia didn't only want FRAND fees, but required cross licensing of patents, something not supposed to happen in consortium based FRAND negotiations. That claim is either true or again Apple is lying to the Judge, so we are again left with it in all likelihood is true.


2) Well withholding FRAND licensing for cross licensed IP, while legal isn't in keeping with the GSM industry consortium normal practices, so that appears unfair even if it is legal. The rest could be quibbled over for days.


The assumption on a settlement is that both parties see it as fair, either because they are going to lose even worse or because the costs of a protracted case will eliminate the value of continuing. Nokia already lost on several of their filed patent claims. Apple got ITC staffing technical committee support on it's claims, but the commissioner overruled the staffers. If that went to trial Apple has a huge advantage because the politics of the ITC commission are removed and the technical staff work suddenly looms huge in a strictly factual arena.



So queue a reason for Nokia to get their hands on all that escrowed money before they risk the the rest of their suits patents being invalidated and the escrowed $$ just getting reabsorbed by Apple. Plus Nokia avoids all risk of losing in the Apple filed patent case, which looked bad for them due to the ITC staffing results. Apple probably pays a little more than their initial FRAND offer, but a mere fraction of the 1-2% of all iPhone sales Nokia wanted, and throw in a couple irrelevant cross licensing deals to give Nokia a face saving PR release.

Is that exactly what happened? Probably not, but it has a lot more plausibility than Apple folding when it held most of the cards left on the table and playable in court for both patent cases.

Again, you are just lieing, pure and simple. Nothing you have just said is true, no matter how much you want it to be. You are one eyed, the above is a great example of it.

Everytime someone says something against Apple, or depends another company you are down on them like a tonne of bricks.

Like I said, start acting like a moderator, not the grumpy old man you make yourself out to me.