Google announces plans to acquire Motorola Mobility for $12.5B - Page 4

I'm glad someone finally noticed this.

Paying a 63% premium on a company for patents that are likely to be no help (at least in any offensive way), and at the risk of losing all your partners, is a move that just reeks of desperation. Whether it works or not, this is definitely not a well thought out play by a reasonable company in control of it's direction IMO.

The other big takeaway for me (and I think for a lot of the general public), is simply that this is the last nail in the coffin of respectability for Google. There is simply no way that they can ever play that game of maintaining that they are different, or more moral, or not as evil as all the other companies. This is a thoroughly grasping, self-serving, *sshole move that makes Apple look like Angels in comparison. It makes Google look nastier than Microsoft IMO and I think the general public will see it that way too.

A good portion of the Android-ites will feel stabbed in the back. Hippies and tech geeks around the world will do yet another double-take and wonder whether they've hitched their wagon to the wrong horse again.

I get so bored of hearing that line. Like Apple really hold back...

Actually the reason that Apple has mostly gone after the OEMs is because some of the patents explicitly cover devices and not software, because in claiming damages from Google they would be limited given Google's limited economic interest in Android and because even if they succeeded the OEMs could still continue to ship Android devices, so it wouldn't benefit their market position.


First off any patent that is 30 years old is dead and gone, patents only last around twenty years. Second Google could always request a USTPO re-examination of Apple's patents, you don't have to be on the receiving end of a suit to do so. Third, apple was already happily triggering the wrath of a firm with 17000 patents and a further 7k pending.

I think the assumption that none of these patents is useful in offence is premature. Whether or not Google has overpaid is unclear, but we know that Moto has patents which are not encumbered and it really only takes one patent that survives invalidation attempts, provides key functionality and cannot be innovated around in order to force Apple and MS to the table.

News on the Apple/Moto suits has been slow for a while, but I imagine we'll start to see more close coverage on them now that they've suddenly become so significant.

What about the Moto purchase is "evil" or "nastier than Microsoft" or makes Apple "look like angels"? Seems to be a pretty straightforward attempt at protecting Android and it's licensee's from patent infringement allegations that other companies often deal with in licensing swaps. This just puts Google on a more level playing field when dealing with Apple/MS doesn't it, rather than kicking Sammy or HTC to the curb?

If true, here's an interesting part of the gamola - mooglie deal:

Some interesting reactions from other players (from TIMN)

Samsung : We welcome todays news, which demonstrates Googles deep commitment to defending Android, its partners, and the ecosystem.

HTC: We welcome the news of todays acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem.

S-E: I welcome Googles commitment to defending Android and its partners.

LG: We welcome Googles commitment to defending Android and its partners.


Is it just me or did somebody supply them with an Open Sourced response

http://thisismynext.com/2011/08/15/g...d-acquisition/

I'd be shocked if Google didn't have some last minute discussions that offered reassurances to the licensees before the official announcement was made.

No, but Microsoft's mobile division is celebrating like crazy today.


HTC, Samsung, etc will have to continue selling Android handsets, but it's easy to predict that they'll put less emphasis on them in the future - particularly if Google does what it does best and screws everyone else with its license terms.


Do you think that HTC and Samsung are too stupid to realize that Google controls it - even if it's a separate division?

The only way out for Google is to sell the hardware division while retaining the patent portfolio. If they include a license to use the patents, they could probably get a reasonable amount for the hardware business while retaining the patents.


It certainly moves to lessen competition - when the OS developer now owns one of the major brands. It could be interesting. I wouldn't be surprised to see the hardware division sold off - both for regulatory reasons and for good business reasons (see above).


Yeah, funny how it was anticompetitive and stifles innovation when Apple's consortium spends $4 B on patents, but it's OK when Google spends 3 times as much, largely for access to the patents. I guess that means that Google stifles innovation 3 times as much.....

Furthermore, the majority of Motorola patents are already being licensed under FRAND terms. It's going to be very hard for Google to leverage that.


It's Google we're talking about. Every action they've taken in the past decade has been based on pure greed and self-centeredness. They apparently don't have any concept that partners are important.


So it's anti-competitive if Apple and Microsoft buy patents, but it increases competition if Google does so...

Does anyone believe ANYTHING these idiots say?

Why does that make you happy? What of "Those that can, innovate. Those that can't sue"?

We all know that Apple has one of the biggest armies of lawyers in the world. But few think that suing is a good business strategy.

It's only that if you believe the PR being spread this morning.

Take a look at what Android's licensees are saying this morning:

http://www.google.com/press/motorola/quotes/

Now tell me you believe that they all believe what they are saying there.

Then read this.

We don't really know exactly what's going to happen here, but if history is a guide it won't be good for the other licensees. It's not likely to be good for Motorola either.

Oh sure, but c'mon - do you not find the responses just a bit soviet in their lock-step-ness?

At the very least Googorola should have supplied a greater variety of talking points for their OEMs

I don't think the general public knows or cares about what Google corporate does as long as they can continue to Google information. This kind of stuff only matters to techies and investors.

Android is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Google? i think it is.
Oracle suing Google has nothing to do with Android? i think it does.

Ah, sorry for missing the actual point you were making. Maybe they all relied on Google Translate for the English version.

Three words: AOL - Time Warner.

I wonder if Motorola Mobility has any patents that will protect Google against Oracle's lawsuit. If Oracle derails Android, Google's purchase of MMI is really going to look expensive.

Or maybe Samsung made the statement first and HTC, LG and S-E just content scraped it

That would be counterproductive. Google's strategy seems to revolve around the belief that if you tell the same lie often enough that people will eventually believe it. Telling DIFFERENT lies isn't as effective.

So let me get this straight. The battle is

Google ("innovator") and $12,500,000,000.00 in freshly re-labelled patents,

v.

Apple ("patent troll") and patents developed internally for the iPhone.

That's a big fly in the ointment.

The most fascinating outcome of this is that there is no longer a software pure play in the mobile world. Suddenly, Apple's business model of offering an integrated system (OS + phone), also espoused by RIM and HP, is the far simpler one. Both GOOG and MSFT have rather complicated business models, not to mention conflict of interest.

Many dissed MSFT when they paid over $1B to get Nokia to (happily) give up on Symbian and Meego. But if you ignore the patents (obvious not at all negligible), GOOG paid a far steeper price.

How did the authorities let this pass?

If SJ thinks this is bad, then Apple can put in a counter-bid for more. Goddess knows Apple's sitting on enough cash. Pay Google the $375 million break-up fee and Moto Mobile's shareholders $13,000,000 and everybody's happy (except Google).

Put differently: If Apple doesn't put in a counter-bid, given the capital resources available to Apple, then SJ isn't worried about this and therefore neither should we be.

This is a thoroughly grasping, self-serving, *sshole move that makes Apple look like Angels in comparison. It makes Google look nastier than Microsoft IMO and I think the general public will see it that way too.


Why on earth would anyone without Apple blinkers on see it that way? A company acquires another ot protects it's investment and that's evil? An **hole move? Self-serving?

How many companies has apple acquired this year? They bought Wi-Gear in November, Siri, Poly9. MS bought Skype and more.

That's a ridiculous comment, and sounds fearful to be honest.

Wow, you manage to cram a lot of wrongness in only 7 words.

1. Authorities haven't even looked at this yet.
2. Authorities will almost certainly pass it as it doesn't reduce the number of handset makers
3. The market clearly believes that this will pass regulatory approval as evidenced by moto's shareprice

Yes! Conceivably, Oracle could end up owning Android... then what would Google do -- they certainly won't be allowed to buy RIMM

... and this is the other side of the coin.

Google's youth may have just cost it big time. Arrogance and naiveté playing hand in hand. Google has shown in the past and present that it believes it is above the laws of business, firm in its belief that they can achieve things that other businesses couldn't and in ways that other businesses couldn't.

Maybe Google is about to get burned big time.

Time will tell.

Change "compete with" to "copy" in the above sentence. Boom: Google's Android business model.

Dear Android partners, we at Google are very happy to see that you've now made your entire businesses dependent on our free and open platform, and we are thrilled to see how the competition between you has shaved your profits on Android hardware down to 5%. It is this great effort of yours which has made Android the worlds leading mobile platform in under two years. Thanks for your help, we could never have done this alone. Today we have some interesting news for you however: We are going to compete directly against you with our own Android hardware!
Now that's what we call open!

PS: Guess who's gonna get first dips on new versions of Android and Google apps from now on *lol*
PPS: Hey, we did tell you anyone could use Android to build handsets, remember? ;-) Cheer up!

Peace out, Larry

Don't be evil indeed.

Sanjay Jha was already used to addressing Google's Eric Schmidt as "You Worship". Might as well make it official. The circle is now complete.

Chrome OS is there as Google's "Plan B." They know Android is doomed, and spewing $12 billion on Motorola Mobility is their last resort. As in "We hope the judge will be lenient because we're just too big to die. Aren't we? Yay open!"

Actually it turns out that this can't happen, or at the very least can't happen easily. After we both brought up the idea in a different thread I did some research and it turns out that apart from the Linux portions, Android is mostly under the Apache license.

The Apache license contains a specific provision whereby if you assert patents against the code so licensed, you immediately lose your access to it. So Oracle has no ability to use even the open sourced Android versions such as Froyo - as it has asserted patents against them.

Oracle may end up in the situation where it is the main financial beneficiary of Android, but it can never take control of the platform without Google's consent.

Maybe this will allow Google to address some of the interface lag seen in Android handsets. If they have the hardware and the software they have not excuse for this. I don't know what Apple and Microsoft did right about their interfaces and touchscreens. I just know that iOS and WP7 have interfaces that are extremely responsive compared to any of the Android phones I've seen, even the Nexus phones.

Wow. Didn't Microsoft do something like this when they were still blindly flailing around with Zune? I seem to recall that there was a Plays For Sure DRM alliance that Microsoft hyped in a last-ditch effort to catch up to iPod. And I seem to recall that Microsoft changed their mind one day and killed off all their hardware partners' products. And Zune still failed miserably.

Or maybe it was just a bad dream. I mean, could any technology firm operating in the 21st century be that stupid?

Any parent company acquiring a target company will fall in its share price because of consideration given to the target company, in this case $12.5 Billion.

Its part of business. It applies to all companies.

Wouldn't it be anti-competitive to give away IP to all but one company?

Apple is able to pay fair market value on the IP once the IP is considered on the market... correct?

It is one thing for a company to not license out their technology, but once they start licensing to other companies for $x dollars, don't other companies get to pay the fair market value?

Would Google be allowed to freely license their IP to all but Apple?

Maybe they would... I don't know.

Add the needed patents to the Open Handset Alliance agreement. Then all Apple has to do is join up to get the benefits.

Maybe. But Google is an incredibly aggressive company with a culture of manifest superiority. They regard themselves as the smartest people in the room, always.

Given that, are they really going to be able to keep their hands off how Motorola designs and delivers phones? Andy Rubin now has a captive hardware design and manufacturing outfit to play with. Is he really going to just deliver the OS like always, or is he going to be interested in getting his hands into the Moto process, the better to deliver the best phone possible? And if he gets his hands into the Moto process, how long before Google starts making "improvements"? After all, Google people are going to encounter Moto people and you have to figure that the Google people are going to consider a lot of them old and second rate, because that's how Google rolls. Do you think they'll just shrug and let them do their thing? Or will they start "suggesting" some key personal to kick things up a notch?

Moto is decidedly old school compared to Google's model of übermenschen remaking the world in their own image. I really can't see things being left as they are, protests about patents and separate companies notwithstanding.

Could well be that is how things play out. For now, I haven't seen anything that makes me think that is the intent. Seems there would have been cheaper alternatives if what they wanted was to get into the hardware game.