or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, Nokia resolve patent dispute with license agreement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Nokia resolve patent dispute with license agreement - Page 3

post #81 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Because HTC has been making phones since 1998 withouth a problem with essential GSM patents like Nokia sued for to Apple?

Again, you don't know that. Nokia isn't the only company with essential patents in this area. As we found out recently, Nortel has a very large patent portfolio that includes essential patents in these areas, which is a major reason why the bidding is around $1 billion for them so far, and why it may go higher. Motorola also has patents in this area, and I wouldn't be surprised if others did as well.


Quote:

What didn't denied Nokia?

Would you word that so it makes sense?
post #82 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Again, you don't know that. Nokia isn't the only company with essential patents in this area. As we found out recently, Nortel has a very large patent portfolio that includes essential patents in these areas, which is a major reason why the bidding is around $1 billion for them so far, and why it may go higher. Motorola also has patents in this area, and I wouldn't be surprised if others did as well.

What has to do that other companies have essential patents with HTC not having paying fees to Nokia?


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Would you word that so it makes sense?

[/quote]

You said that nokia didn't denied some claims from Apple. What claims?
post #83 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Please, provide any example of those much knowed fees and quantities paid by royalties on those license agreements.


What pays HTC, Motorola, Samsung, RIM, Apple or Palm (now HP) to Noki for the essential GSM technology?

If they are prety much known you can provide quantities, don't you?

Don't play dumb about this. None of us here are in the industry, and so we are not prospective licensees. If we were, then we could obtain the information. How about YOU getting it?

Here, made it easy for you:

http://www.nokia.com/about-nokia/con...cense-requests
post #84 of 135
The issue was never Apple paying. Apple knew it had to pay. The issue was Nokia wanting Apple to pay discriminatory licensing fees. Nokia was trying to subject Apple to more in licensing fees then it did the other licensees and additional conditions. Since Nokia made those patents freely available to the standard's body, which Apple is a member, Nokia couldn't do that.
post #85 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Don't play dumb about this. None of us here are in the industry, and so we are not prospective licensees. If we were, then we could obtain the information. How about YOU getting it?

Here, made it easy for you:

http://www.nokia.com/about-nokia/con...cense-requests

Ah, so you were only speculation and all that talk about it is know, etc was utterly wrong.
post #86 of 135
This is a very good article about FRANd, and the telecommunications industry regarding IP in general. It shows ythat Nokia has sued before, though that's just a sideline. I believe that it does show how companies like Nokia use their patent portfolio, and it's directed towards the problems of that usage. Well worth a read.

http://www.ipeg.com/_UPLOAD%20BLOG/C...OE_article.pdf
post #87 of 135
Sure that is what Apple said. Nokia hasn't denied it either. It also is more believable then Apple just refusing to pay the licenses that everybody else has to pay. Apple pays other parties in the licensing body, why wouldn't Apple pay?

Apple thought it would strong arm Apple. Now that Nokia is going Windows it makes sense for Nokia to give Apple the licensing terms it should, and stop trying to get cross licensing agreements from Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

That's what Apple said, do you know how much other companies pay and what Apple was asked to pay?
post #88 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

What has to do that other companies have essential patents with HTC not having paying fees to Nokia?

Because you don't know if Nokia actually does own essential patents, or whether other companies own patents that can work around that. That a major problem in these cases. If you read the link I just provided, you'll see that companies often CLAIM that their patents are essential, but sometimes are not. You'll also see that they bundle a large group of patents together that they claim are essential as a group, when only some of the patents may be essential, thereby attempting to get others to license all of them, rather than just the ones needed, at much greater cost.

It's possible that that's what Nokia attempted to do here, though without understanding exactly what each patent does, and how important it is, none of us here can make that determination.


Quote:

You said that nokia didn't denied some claims from Apple. What claims?

Ok, when using a word, such as you have with "deny", in the way you did, you don't change it to the past tense. The word is simply "deny". Or, you can say that Nokia denied some claims, but then don't use the word "didn't".

That was what was confusing.

Nokia didn't specifically deny Apples' claims as to what they were asking for the IP, they just said that they were fair. That doesn't actually say anything about the specific claims themselves. If I ask you to pay twice what I'm asking everyone else, I can say it's fair. But that doesn't say anything.
post #89 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Ah, so you were only speculation and all that talk about it is know, etc was utterly wrong.

So you are going to play dumb. Too bad. Read the article I posted. It will give you some understanding of this issue.
post #90 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Because you don't know if Nokia actually does own essential patents, or whether other companies own patents that can work around that.

Nokia does own essential patents to GSM. Go read through the ETSI mailing lists.
post #91 of 135
This is another legal description of FRAND that is recommended.

http://apps.americanbar.org/antitrus...ts-Dolmans.ppt
post #92 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Nokia does own essential patents to GSM. Go read through the ETSI mailing lists.

Which ones?
post #93 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb View Post

Good news is always welcome.

I guess apple arent always that innovative after all.

The big question now is will Nokia make more money in 2015 from the sale of windows phones or from royalties from iPhone / iPad sales?



And of course, which company will Nokia go after next. My guess is HTC because they are on track to sell over 40 million smartphones this calendar year.

Your misinformation defines you. This is a small technology patent dealing with communications - how the phone contacts with the carriers. It's nothing about the operating system or the innovations of the iPhone. It's also licensed by many other companies.

This all started when Nokia wanted to charge Apple much more in royalties than they charge any other company. Apple wouldn't pay the excessive amount, which led Nokia to start the lawsuits, which Apple then escalated. I'll bet you that this settlement is for Apple to pay the same amount of royalties as everyone else (that's a small amount per phone), with a payment to make up for past royalties. The actual amount might be adjusted (or not) for Nokia using any Apple patents.
post #94 of 135
You mean other then the Court documents supplied to the federal court that are filed under under oath? What more do you need blood? The Court documents are online. Apple makes that statement repeatedly in the documents (I read all of the filed documents).

Perhaps not, but they are supposed to be nondiscriminatory. You can't require cross licensing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

No, F/RAND deals aren't fixed and equal for everybody


Can you provide any proof of Nokia demanding access to apple patents instead of money?
post #95 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

A phone that can't make phone calls or connect to a wireless network isn't going to sell very well.

you mean like the itouch?

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply
post #96 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Was it?

Yes it was. You continue your aggressively self interested flavor of word parsing.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #97 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by drdb View Post

Apple always recognised that they needed to pay Nokia for these licenses (they are mainly to do with mobile phone technology Nokia developed with others well before Apple got into phones). The dispute was over the terms. Nokia were demanding larger royalties from Apple than from other manufacturers, so Apple threw their own patents back at Nokia. Now they've finally agreed terms, terms we'll probably never know.

This should be the first comment after the original post to put off trolls and misconceptions.
post #98 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Which ones?

GSM 08.58 is a good place to start. You'll need to register to access the archives.
post #99 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

This should be the first comment after the original post to put off trolls and misconceptions.

Threw their patents back and got nowhere. It should be the first comment for those trying to put a pro-apple spin on a situation where they had to eat it. And make no mistake, eat it they have my son. The full length.
post #100 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

This should be the first comment after the original post to put off trolls and misconceptions.

Misconceptions like that Nokia/Motorola/Qualcomm can't demand different royalties for the same patents to different companies?
post #101 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

So you are going to play dumb. Too bad. Read the article I posted. It will give you some understanding of this issue.

The article doesn't say nothing about fees been public or that everyone pays the same amount
post #102 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

This should be the first comment after the original post to put off trolls and misconceptions.

By definition, trolls aren't put off by facts, because that's not what they're interested in.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #103 of 135
It's pretty clever when you think about what has just occurred. Apple paid a small price to jack with the green bots.

For those not paying attention, watch who Nokia targets next.
post #104 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

It's pretty clever when you think about what has just occurred. Apple paid a small price to jack with the green bots.

For those not paying attention, watch who Nokia targets next.

So once every Android manufacturer is paying MS for every phone and Nokia for every phone (and quite possible Oracle for every copy of the OS) I wonder what that does to the economics?

HTC will probably be OK, they seem to be emerging as the preeminent Android handset partner. Samsung has deep pockets, although their profitability seems to be a bit variable. But Motorola? LG? Sony Ericsson? They can't turn much of a profit to save their lives, and for those guys it wouldn't take much to turn the whole Android business into a money pit. Sure, they sell a lot of phones, but apparently not at a profit. How close to the edge are they? Would a Nokia tax be the tipping point?

For the record, I actually think it would do the Android market good to have a few strong handset partners making far fewer but higher quality handsets. Less fragmentation, more focus, more coherent story. As things are going, "Android" is very soon going to lose it's magic powers of consumer interest, and sticking that little green guy on all your ads is going to start seeming tired. It's merely ubiquitous.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #105 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

It's pretty clever when you think about what has just occurred. Apple paid a small price to jack with the green bots.

For those not paying attention, watch who Nokia targets next.

And why green bots have to pay to Nokia?
post #106 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

A phone that can't make phone calls or connect to a wireless network isn't going to sell very well.

Unless it's the iPhone 4.

...


Wow, tough crowd.
post #107 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

And why green bots have to pay to Nokia?

For the same reason Apple had to. Is Android not an iPhone replica?

Just who do you think Elop is referring to when he says Nokia will now focus on other licensee opportunities in the communications market?

And the other guys' margins are a lot slimmer... meaning they can't afford to pay royalties. If they crash and burn, who benefits?

Yep.
post #108 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

For the same reason Apple had to. Is Android not an iPhone replica?

They are phones and those companies have been making phones way before Apple.

Do you know the patents implied on the lawsuit? If no, look for them. They doesn't have to do with iOS but with GSM and other phone technologies, licensed by all the other phone manufacturers.
post #109 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

They are phones and those companies have been making phones way before Apple.

Do you know the patents implied on the lawsuit? If no, look for them. They doesn't have to do with iOS but with GSM and other phone technologies, licensed by all the other phone manufacturers.

There are 46 patents that cover everything from multitasking(a feature of iOS), to bluetooth and call quality.
post #110 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

There are 46 patents that cover everything from multitasking(a feature of iOS), to bluetooth and call quality.

Nop, the "essential" patents where ten and no one about OS things
post #111 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Nokia is a so saying that licensing fees make up a fair portion of the is profits, while Apple is saying that that case isn't true for them. So if Nokia was trying to force Apple to cross license, in addition to asking for higher licensing fees, then it's no wonder they couldn't come to terms.

Good old Melgross, nice to see you are still as predictable as ever. Hope you don't hurt your neck with your backtracking...
post #112 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Hawkeye_ View Post

That should read: The Finnish handset maker is currently undergoing a transitional phase from its Symbian platform to the grave.

And that wisdom is based on..?

A. Dream
B. Drugs inducted hallucinations
C. Michael Jackson's "Thriler"
D. Romero classic zombie movies
F. Some reasoning - in that case, please provide.
post #113 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post

They are having to eat it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post

eating it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post

eat it they have my son.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post

Eating it doesn't require a good argument. You just eat it. Simple.

What is with your disturbed oral fixation?
post #114 of 135
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:

"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

Did Apple prove that Nokia is asking less from other manufacturers?
post #115 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

It's wll know for whom?

Can you provide thos agreements and the extortion Nokia tried to do to Apple? Thanks

C'mon, man, it is well known.
post #116 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

By definition, trolls aren't put off by facts, because that's not what they're interested in.

True, that. Some trolls actually think Apple won this one. Can you believe it?
post #117 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

C'mon, man, it is well known.

Because if enough people say something it must be true, right?
post #118 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Yes it was. You continue your aggressively self interested flavor of word parsing.

Not it wasn't. he was just trying to create noise (just like you are now) to hide from fact that he was wrong to start with.
post #119 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Not it wasn't. he was just trying to create noise (just like you are now) to hide from fact that he was wrong to start with.

yeah.. I was trying to create noise But hey, look who posted 10 posts so far debating whether my post was clear or not. Everyone, except you, knows my post was clear. So no one really care what you think my post mean.

As usual, you are always here to troll but only when Nokia's name shows up.
post #120 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

yeah.. I was trying to create noise But hey, look who posted 10 posts so far debating whether my post was clear or not. Everyone, except you, knows my post was clear. So no one really care what you think my post mean.

10 posts? since anyone can see the history, why don't you start telling the truth? And actually most people don't care about your post full stop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

As usual, you are always here to troll but only when Nokia's name shows up.

You mean like you are here to "troll" about Apple?

Everyone remember the Appleinsider rules, if you disagree with Apple, you are a troll, if you disagree with anyone on this site, you are a troll.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple, Nokia resolve patent dispute with license agreement