or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UN looks to slow wireless tech patent war with 'Patent Roundtable'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UN looks to slow wireless tech patent war with 'Patent Roundtable'

post #1 of 45
Thread Starter 
The United Nation's International Telecommunications Union arm is calling smartphone makers and mobile industry bodies together to discuss ways to halt snowballing patent litigation and expects to focus on standards-essential FRAND patents which many believe to be at the center of the disputes.

The ITU said attendees of its "Patent Roundtable" need to address "innovation-stifling use of intellectual property" that has resulted in the sales bans of a number of devices like the Samsung Galaxy Tab, reports the BBC. The meeting is scheduled to take place in Geneva on October 10.

At the heart of the summit are so-called FRAND patents, or standards-essential innovations like 3G wireless technology that are promised to be licensed in fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory manner. Apple and Microsoft recently joined forces in an EU antitrust filing against Motorola's alleged unfair use of its standards-essential properties including an H.264 video streaming codec.

"We are seeing an unwelcome trend in today's marketplace to use standards-essential patents to block markets," said ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun Tour?. "There needs to be an urgent review of this situation: patents are meant to encourage innovation, not stifle it."

Dr. Hamadoun Tour?
ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun Tour?.
Source: ITU


Confusing the situation is FRAND interpretation and the ITU said the companies leveraging the essential patents often disagree with licensees over what royalties are fair and reasonable which reportedly prompted a number of lawsuits and injunctions.

"The situation is complex and it's very easy for someone to complain something is not fair because it is adverse to their position," said Illya Kazi, a member of the UK's Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. "I don't think there's a simple answer. High-level talks can't be a bad thing, but I would be surprised if they can come up with an agreed implementable conclusion."

Motorola was able to institute a temporary sales ban on Apple's iPhone and iPad after the Cupertino-based company refused to pay royalties for certain GPRS technology used in the devices' Qualcomm GSM chip. For its part Apple argued that it was a beneficiary by extension of the Qualcomm license but the claim was found as tenuous. The now Google-owned Motorola was also able to shut down Apple's iCloud push services after successfully leveraging a packet transfer patent.

FRAND patent litigation has become such a problem that EU antitrust watchdog the European Commission is investigating Motorola and Samsung over its conduct regarding use of the standards-essential properties against competitors.

A statement from the ITU said that the high-level talks will "include potential improvements to existing policy frameworks, entitlement to injunctive reliefs, and definitions of what constitutes a royalty base."
post #2 of 45

Oh wonderful. Here's a group of people who get even less done than those hard working civil servants we have in Washington. Not to mention the simple fact they have zero jurisdiction.  

post #3 of 45
Google and their FRAND abusing cronies need to be brought to heel.

Their hypocritical stance regarding standards essential patents has to stop.

Steve Jobs was quite clear, stop copying, innovate your own stuff and there is no need for legal action.

A lot of these actions started a year or more ago, various legal systems are so slow the "escalation" is only coming to light now.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #4 of 45

The UN has no jurisdiction over these issues whatsoever. Last time I checked, the US is a sovereign nation. Who the hell do they think they are?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #5 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Google and their FRAND abusing cronies need to be brought to heel.
Their hypocritical stance regarding standards essential patents has to stop.
Steve Jobs was quite clear, stop copying, innovate your own stuff and there is no need for legal action.
A lot of these actions started a year or more ago, various legal systems are so slow the "escalation" is only coming to light now.

 

This will all be settled in the courts. It's none of the UN's business.... at all!

 

The US needs to stop funding the UN. What a bloody joke.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #6 of 45

The UN is disgusting and the US should definitely withdraw from that joke of an organization. How those corrupt and filthy totalitarian bastards are allowed to have their headquarters in this country is mind blogging. The UN has been trying to take control of the internet for a while now, and they are a threat to freedom, a threat to the US and they are an enemy entity as far as I am concerned.

 

 

Get the UN’s hands off the Internet 

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/hands-internet-article-1.1108624

post #7 of 45

A huge percentage (> 70%) of the articles on AI's front page involves some kind of legal dispute or issue. It's very depressing. I've slowed my visits to AI because instead of Apple new about upcoming hardware, reviews of apps or software, we're treated to this legal shit.

 

I'm an Apple fan about it's products, period. 

post #8 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by superdx View Post

A huge percentage (> 70%) of the articles on AI's front page involves some kind of legal dispute or issue.

A huge percentage of Apple's fight right now is against thieves.
Quote:
It's very depressing.

How many thieves there are.
Quote:
I've slowed my visits to AI because instead of Apple new about upcoming hardware, reviews of apps or software, we're treated to this legal shit. I'm an Apple fan about it's products, period. 

Are you claiming they don't post news about upcoming hardware in lieu of legal stuff? Everything's posted as it comes in. If you're not seeing it, they're not getting it.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #9 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

.... Last time I checked, the US is a sovereign nation. ...

This part is not completely true.

The US and other signatories to the WTO/GATT voluntarily gave up some of their sovereignty so that unelected, unaccountable persons could adjudicate trade disputes.

This troubles me more than any ineffectual UN grandstanding.

post #10 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensi View Post

Apple ][

 

You are such a joke and a caricature of the ignorant, reactionary, far-right conditioned nutjob on nearly every topic that it is well beyond the pale. Go back enlightening you with your tabloids gutter-level drivels, lol.

 

Dumb and ignorant ad-hominem attacks will get you nowhere. If you disagree with anything that I write or claim, then feel free to argue it, if you have any counter arguments at all to make.

post #11 of 45

Whatever the rights and wrongs of each case, clearly the current patent system is broken. The only people winning are the lawyers.

 

I wish the ITU well but I don't see any mood for compromise just yet. I would have thought WIPO should be the one taking more of a lead on this issue.

post #12 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

This part is not completely true.

The US and other signatories to the WTO/GATT voluntarily gave up some of their sovereignty so that unelected, unaccountable persons could adjudicate trade disputes.

This troubles me more than any ineffectual UN grandstanding.

 

WTF?!?

 

What has the UN got to do with the WTO? Am I the one who's been taking crazy pills here?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #13 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

I wouldn't waste your energy. He posts these ridiculous comments in every thread. Just ignore him like the rest of us do.

 

He just got blocked by me... ah... sweet relief.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #14 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

I wouldn't waste your energy. He posts these ridiculous comments in every thread. Just ignore him like the rest of us do.

I get that a few people don't like me here. I'm ok with that, because I'm outspoken and I tell it like I see it, and that may offend a few Fandroids and various peasants, but there's no reason for you to lie. 

 

As a matter of fact, I have the #1 top rated post for the past seven days. Your little lie doesn't jive too well with reality.

 

And I still wish for a reverse-ignore switch on this forum, because there are certain posters whom I would block from ever reading my posts.


Edited by Apple ][ - 7/6/12 at 6:31pm
post #15 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


I would argue that the majority of folks here question your sense of reality that much more given using NY Daily News as a source.
The issues here cross national boundaries. We have already seen the mess that is created by spreading all the lawsuits across jurisdictions. Specifically for FRAND, where standards have global implications, it makes sense to have an independent body preside.
Would you rather have the IEEE be responsible for it?! How about MPEG-LA?

 

The UN? Where in their charter does it say they are responsible for negotiating patent disputes? That's outrageous! It's a matter for the WTO and/or the companies involved to solve in court. What the hell is wrong with this picture?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

He just got blocked by me... ah... sweet relief.

 

The person who gave your post a thumbs up in this thread was me. I certainly regret that now, and I wish that I could take that back.

post #17 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

Whatever the rights and wrongs of each case, clearly the current patent system is broken. The only people winning are the lawyers.

 

I wish the ITU well but I don't see any mood for compromise just yet. I would have thought WIPO should be the one taking more of a lead on this issue.

 

The system is working! Conflicts get sorted out in court, not by politicians. This is strictly a business matter, FFS.

 

The lawyers are the only ones winning? Where does this nonsense come from?

 

Next thing you know, the world court will be running America. Screw that!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #18 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151141/un-looks-to-slow-wireless-tech-patent-war-with-patent-roundtable#post_2141918"]
Dumb and ignorant ad-hominem attacks will get you nowhere. If you disagree with anything that I write or claim, then feel free to argue it, if you have any counter arguments at all to make.
That's not the way to do it.
Why try to discuss something rationally with a well thought-out case when you can simply do a drive by?
Kinda like PETA and GreenPeace. ;-)
(I gave a thumps up for your response)
post #19 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

The system is working! Conflicts get sorted out in court, not by politicians. This is strictly a business matter, FFS.

 

The lawyers are the only ones winning? Where does this nonsense come from?

 

Next thing you know, the world court will be running America. Screw that!

Might be better off considering the US economy is in the toilet...

post #20 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

(I gave a thumps up for your response)

 

Thanks!

 

People may not always agree with what I write, but I don't run away from any arguments, and I'm usually always willing to debate anybody who disagrees.

post #21 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I get that a few people don't like me here. I'm ok with that, because I'm outspoken and I tell it like I see it, and that may offend a few Fandroids and various peasants, but there's no reason for you to lie. 

 

As a matter of fact, I have the #1 top rated post for the past seven days. Your little lie doesn't jive too well with reality.

 

And I still wish for an anti-ignore switch on this forum, because there are certain posters whom I would block from ever reading my posts.

 

That's a good idea. I think most people would happily never read another one of your posts ever again.

 

I can certainly believe you have the #1 most annoying post. In fact you probably hold positions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ,7, 8, 9 and 10 as well.

 

I can live with outspoken but not ignorant, rude, racist and down right nasty. The fact that you call people "peasants" says it all really.

post #22 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

The system is working! Conflicts get sorted out in court, not by politicians. This is strictly a business matter, FFS.

 

The lawyers are the only ones winning? Where does this nonsense come from?

 

Next thing you know, the world court will be running America. Screw that!

 

All that means is judges decide these issues rather than politicians. Not sure how that helps anyone.

 

How much have Apple spent on lawyers in the past few years on these cases? And they've still had many of their requests dismissed.

 

Patents are worldwide not just in the US. We need some form of international control otherwise Apple would have to sue in every single country they sell their goods. How does that make any sense?

post #23 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

The only people winning are the lawyers.

 

Apple's lawyers saved the company SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS by getting an East Texas patent trolling decision overturned.

 

This single decision paid for their costs many times over.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #24 of 45

The point is that it should probably never have made it to court in the first place.

post #25 of 45

I consider the United Nations getting involved a good thing.

 

It may bring positive results and, if it doesn't, it'll raise awareness of the issue, and is unlikely to affect Apple anyway.

There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #26 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

I consider the United Nations getting involved a good thing.

 

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but are you aware that some of the countries that are most in favor of the UN getting more involved in the internet are some of the worst and most restrictive countries on the face of the planet? It's no surprise that censor happy and not free countries like China and Russia are in favor of the UN gaining more control of the internet and countries like the US are very much opposed to it. The more the UN is involved in something, the more restrictions will happen. Dictators and murderers all over the world are wishing for the UN to take over the internet, as they will be the ones who benefit the most from it.

 

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-01/is-the-un-the-next-big-threat-to-internet-freedom

post #27 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but are you aware that some of the countries that are most in favor of the UN getting more involved in the internet are some of the worst and most restrictive countries on the face of the planet? It's no surprise that censor happy and not free countries like China and Russia are in favor of the UN gaining more control of the internet and countries like the US are very much opposed to it. The more the UN is involved in something, the more restrictions will happen. Dictators and murderers all over the world are wishing for the UN to take over the internet, as they will be the ones who benefit the most from it.

 

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-01/is-the-un-the-next-big-threat-to-internet-freedom

 

That's an interesting article, and did make me aware of some issues that I wasn't aware of.

 

Maybe if they keep their business to the topic of "innovation-stifling use of intellectual property" only, and keep their grubby little international hands off anything else, I can't see the harm.

 

I guess we'll wait and see what happens...

There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #28 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Maybe if they keep their business to the topic of "innovation-stifling use of intellectual property" only, and keep their grubby little international hands off anything else, I can't see the harm.

 

 

Perhaps, but for some reason, I don't really see them as being trustworthy, impartial or being able to do a good job. But as you said, we'll see what happens. :)

post #29 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

This part is not completely true.

The US and other signatories to the WTO/GATT voluntarily gave up some of their sovereignty so that unelected, unaccountable persons could adjudicate trade disputes.

This troubles me more than any ineffectual UN grandstanding.

 

WTF?!?

 

What has the UN got to do with the WTO? Am I the one who's been taking crazy pills here?

If you read my post, I was addressing your misconception that the US was sovereign, not making any connection between the UN and WTO. I don't know what kind of pills you take, but I have observed similar effects of learning about our lack of sovereignty on people who suffer from the free trade/small government syndrome.  When confronted with the reality that our laws can be superseded by rulings from some faceless, possibly non-American, corporate lackey, they sometimes experience anxiety.

post #30 of 45
What's up with you fellows?

ITU is a part of UN an they have set international standards for telecoms for longer than most of your lives! And it has worked perfect. Now some companies who regularly participate in setting standards starts to attack each other even thou they committed to not doing it when voting for the very same standards. Thus this initiative by UN.

No, UN has no jurisdiction in US. Also US has no jurisdiction outside US either. So, for telecommunications to work across the globe and not only in Texas, ITU is the place where standards has been decided for a long time. All biggies thru the years has been part of it Bell Laps, Motorola, Ericsson, Lucent, Cisco, Nokia, NTT, Mitsubischi and many more. Simply makes it possible to place a call from NY to Stockholm. But it also makes it possible to sell the same products across the globe. A win for the human kind and for participating companies.

The FRAND way of working is from this ITU world and it has worked fine. When it seem to stop working it's about time they discuss what should be done.

This is not only a matter for American courts.
post #31 of 45
I love standards; there are so many to choose from.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #32 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensi View Post

Hopefully US judges like Posner could also push for a cleanup of the US mess over patents.

 

 

It's about time that out-of-touch 70+ year old idiot Posner retired or croaked it IMO.

post #33 of 45

The UN can jog on as well.

 

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but are you aware that some of the countries that are most in favor of the UN getting more involved in the internet are some of the worst and most restrictive countries on the face of the planet? It's no surprise that censor happy and not free countries like China and Russia are in favor of the UN gaining more control of the internet and countries like the US are very much opposed to it. The more the UN is involved in something, the more restrictions will happen. Dictators and murderers all over the world are wishing for the UN to take over the internet, as they will be the ones who benefit the most from it.

 

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-01/is-the-un-the-next-big-threat-to-internet-freedom

 

 

Precisely.

post #34 of 45

 http://www.everythingisaremix.info/

 

No one should claim to own their invention 100%. Where is the recognition of the help society gave you. Nor should it be a super long term thing. 5, 10 years is a long time today.

 

But direct copying, plagiarism, misleading trading, that's wrong too.

post #35 of 45

The UN DOES have jurisdiction in the EU. Typical ignorant American thinking they're the only country in the world.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

The UN has no jurisdiction over these issues whatsoever. Last time I checked, the US is a sovereign nation. Who the hell do they think they are?

post #36 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by pragmatous View Post

The UN DOES have jurisdiction in the EU. Typical ignorant American thinking they're the only country in the world.

I don't see where he said that. Care to point it out?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #37 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by pragmatous View Post

The UN DOES have jurisdiction in the EU. Typical ignorant American thinking they're the only country in the world.

 

That's a shame for typical ignorant Europeans. The US will never allow itself to get played or to be dictated to by the moronic UN, which represents the greatest threat to world peace and freedom currently in existence. The US won't bail you guys out again and save your asses after it's too late, like we have done in the past.

post #38 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151141/un-looks-to-slow-wireless-tech-patent-war-with-patent-roundtable#post_2142316"]The US won't bail you guys out again and save your asses after it's too late, like we have done in the past.

But we will keep giving money to every single other country in the world, despite their political alignment or need for the money during our own economic hardship… for no reason, apparently.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #39 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


But we will keep giving money to every single other country in the world, despite their political alignment or need for the money during our own economic hardship… for no reason, apparently.

Yes, I can't disagree with you on that, unfortunately.

post #40 of 45

Reposted here, the more appropriate thread:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacepower View Post


I think your missing the order of events here...
A patent cannot be essential to a standard unless it is already/or will be pledged to a standard. By this it means that the patent owner willingly puts forth its patents under the assumption of FRAND, willing to license to anyone.
By definition, a patent can't be "essential" to a standard if it is not part of a standard. If it is part of a standard then it has be to licensed on frand terms, according to the ITU, ISO, and IEEE. 

From ETSI:

"For the avoidance of doubt in exceptional cases where a STANDARD can only be implemented by technical solutions, all of which are infringements of IPRs, all such IPRs shall be considered ESSENTIAL."

 

Going further than that despite Microsoft's loud and long protests to the EU, they were ordered to not only license their server tech including appropriate patents, but told it would be on FRAND terms, available to all competitors.

 

From MS:  "The Commission also held that Microsoft violated EU competition law by failing to disclose to competitors some of its most innovative technologies relating to “server” operating systems (i.e., back-office computers that help run networks). The Commission reached this conclusion despite the fact that many of the world’s most powerful IT companies, such as IBM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Novell, and Red Hat, compete vigorously in the supply of server operating systems. The Commission ordered Microsoft to create extensive documents describing its complex and innovative technologies – many of which are protected by patents and trade secrets – and to license these technologies to competitors. In recent months, the Commission has broadened the scope of this compulsory license considerably by holding that Microsoft: (i) must license these technologies even outside Europe; (ii) must license these technologies royalty-free; and (iii) cannot prevent licensees from disclosing Microsoft trade secrets in their source code."

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legal/european/EU_Competition_Overview.mspx

 

As for your comments on Mr. Mueller, if you spent much time here you might know that FOSSPatents is one of my three go-to sources on patent litigation, the other two being PatentlyO and Groklaw. In the case of Mr. Mueller, he almost always has the facts he chooses to use correct, which is admirable and a good reason for my daily visits to his blog. He just doesn't mention any that might not be beneficial to Microsoft's goals (nor Oracle's now). You never found it odd that there's not even one article at FOSSPatents criticising Microsoft? 

 

Motorola isn't saying "that's the way it should work". On the contrary it's the way it does work, and there's little doubt Mr. Mueller is well aware of that. Since it doesn't advance Microsoft's arguments to have a mention by Mueller that MS partner Nokia reportedly wants 2.5% of a finished consumer-ready device cost for a single patent, up to 5% for 10 or more, he's not going to say a word about it. Qualcomm wants 3.5% of a completed device price not just a chipset, but don't expect FOSSPatents to mention it since it's an inconvenient fact. And those are just the two of the bigger ones. According to the ETSI, companies from Ericsson to Alcatel, and ZTE to Huawei receive royalty payments based on a percentage of a finished consumer device's price. It's not the rarity that "someone" apparently convinced you it is. 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/56757.html

 

I believe Microsoft's goal, Apple's as well, is to isolate Motorola as a rogue patent claimant, basing royalties on the "ridiculous notion" of a finished device. Pointing out that it's a common royalty basis for FRAND royalties in the telecom industry would not support his client's claims would it? How else to explain his failure to mention it while portraying Moto as an outlier. I believe this is all about competition and holding an advantage, and less about belief by any of the parties that it's "unfair" or unusual.

 

So contrary to what you might think, yes I do read every single article that's posted at FOSSPatents. I also read the Twitter links he offers to better understand his sources and views. But I don't trust him to tell me the whole story. He's paid to offer support to his clients, Oracle and Microsoft among others, and IMO that support appears to extend into his personal blogs, evidenced by the total lack of any concerns or criticisms written about them. He's great with the facts. Just realize he'll dole out only those that aren't at odds with his clients gameplans as far as I can see.

 

Would I go so far as to say Motorola or Samsung's use of SEP's to seek injunctions is proper? No sir. Nor do I necessarily agree with a device BOM being the proper royalty basis in all cases but at the same time that's been seen as proper, even by Microsoft, for a long time. Neither Apple nor Microsoft should be able to avoid paying the same royalties requested from other licensees (with credit for patents granted back in return, ie cross-licensing) and there should be consequences. I don't see any obvious reason those penalties could not be determined by a court, altho they should seldom get that far IMO. I don't support injunctions as a proper cure except in the possible case that an infringer absolutely refuses to pay royalties under any circumstance and in opposition to court rulings..

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UN looks to slow wireless tech patent war with 'Patent Roundtable'