or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page

post #1 of 92
Thread Starter 
Apple's chief executive Tim Cook is reported to be engaged in discussions with his Google counterpart Larry Page, covering mobile patents and related intellectual property disputes between the two.

According to a report by Reuters, Page and Cook "had a phone conversation last week," and "are expected to talk again in the coming weeks."

Lower level executives from the two tech companies are also said to be involved in ongoing discussions, an apparent change following Apple's decisive win in its latest patent battle with Android licensee Samsung.

So far, Apple and Google haven't duked it out in court yet, with Apple instead fighting directly only with Google's Android licensees HTC, Samsung and Motorola Mobility, although the latter is now a Google subsidiary.

It's not known if Apple and Google are considering a broad cross licensing agreement (as Apple pursued with Microsoft, subject to specific "anti cloning" exceptions to protect its unique iPhone and iPad designs), or if the discussions are more limited in nature.

Apple's former chief executive Steve Jobs privately called Android a "stolen product" and told his biographer he was determined to use Apple's resources to "destroy" it.

Jobs also expressed betrayal by Google's former chief executive, Eric Schmidt, who directed the company to shift Android into direct competition against the iPhone while sitting on Apple's board.

In his own discussions with Schmidt, Jobs reportedly said, "I don't want your money. If you offer me $5 billion, I won't want it. I've got plenty of money. I want you to stop using our ideas in Android, that's all I want."

While Android is generally based upon Linux and JavaME, Apple has argued that it runs afoul of core patented technology developed at Apple, having noted that Android's primary developer Andy Rubin got started working at Apple in the 1990s.

Andy Rubin, from Apple to Android


Apple has also accused various Android licensees of copying its unique user interface features, charges that in many cases are related to features of Android itself.

Apple debuted the iPhone with strong support for Google's web search, mapping services and YouTube videos, but has since taken major steps to back away from its dependance upon Google, notably including the development of its own mapping services in the upcoming iOS 6.
post #2 of 92
Well, duh.

Why would this be news? Obviously, Apple is talking with everyone who might be infringing. If they reach an agreement, THEN it would be news.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #3 of 92

Android won't be going away, it's time to deal with it one way or another. I'm personally ok with a licensing deal. That said, cutting Google off from making money from the iPhone (first maps, then?), while taking money from them for every android device is pretty much sticking it to them.

post #4 of 92

If this goes anywhere, it'll end in a cross-licensing deal with no royalties paid either way--and that would be ultimately what a fan of iOS or Android would want.

post #5 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalG View Post

Android won't be going away, it's time to deal with it one way or another. I'm personally ok with a licensing deal. That said, cutting Google off from making money from the iPhone (first maps, then?), while taking money from them for every android device is pretty much sticking it to them.

and that would be perfectly fine with me (and probably a lot of other folks).

post #6 of 92

Don't see how there can be settlement given Apple has a lot more relevant patents than Google. Plus, Google has no control over the OEMs on copying iDevices, so the settlement can only be on the software side, and I don't see the lawsuits between Apple and the OEMs going away even with a settlement.

post #7 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

If this goes anywhere, it'll end in a cross-licensing deal with no royalties paid either way--and that would be ultimately what a fan of iOS or Android would want.

 

 

Um....What IP does Google own that Apple wants?

All of those FRAND patents? LOL.

post #8 of 92

Apple setting out their terms. 

 

"We *won't* sue you into oblivion if you meet the following conditions . . ."

post #9 of 92

Tim:  $30-$40 for every single Android device on the market? Sure, Larry... but you still can't have access to our best patents for that. If it comes to that, we'll sue you to the end of time.

 

Larry:  I gotta go change my underwear.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #10 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

 

 

Um....What IP does Google own that Apple wants?

All of those FRAND patents? LOL.

 

Just because Google doesn't litigate based on their IP, you honestly, truly believe that Google owns absolutely nothing that Apple wants?

post #11 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

Just because Google doesn't litigate based on their IP, you honestly, truly believe that Google owns absolutely nothing that Apple wants?

Are you arguing the difference between filing complaints to the ITC and litigation?
post #12 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel View Post


Are you arguing the difference between filing complaints to the ITC and litigation?

 

No.

post #13 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post

Google owns mostly FRAND patents. They have to license it to Apple at the same price as they license it to other companies. They can't threaten to withhold it from Apple like they have been trying to do. Their patents have no real power. Apple meanwhile has a massive non-FRAND patent portfolio and they don't have to license to anyone if they don't want to.

 

Google has locked itself into a losing position. Apple could sue them into a "living on skid row" position if they want. One thing is certain, if Tim agrees to patent armistice, he needs to make it hurt for Google.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #14 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

Google has locked itself into a losing position. Apple could sue them into a "living on skid row" position if they want. One thing is certain, if Tim agrees to patent armistice, he needs to make it hurt for Google.

 

What are you talking about? Do you have any sort of evidence to back up your speculations?

post #15 of 92

Whats ip does apple own that google wants? 

post #16 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

What are you talking about? Do you have any sort of evidence to back up your speculations?

It is pretty common knowledge that Google's purchase of Motorola Mobility was due to a desire to beef up their patent trove, which was considerably lacking compared to older companies.

Please remember that Google is by far the new kid on the block.
post #17 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


That would be the best outcome.
Talented as jobs was at CEO, I'm glad he's dead as his thermonuclear war against android was unrealistic. Hopefully cook is a lot more level headed in dealing with such issues.

 

 

Google holding up under a legal IP microscope is also . . . unrealistic. 

post #18 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

 

Just because Google doesn't litigate based on their IP, you honestly, truly believe that Google owns absolutely nothing that Apple wants?

Wants back, you mean?

post #19 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

That would be the best outcome.
Talented as jobs was at CEO, I'm glad he's dead as his thermonuclear war against android was unrealistic. Hopefully cook is a lot more level headed in dealing with such issues.

You're "glad he's dead"??

You can leave. The door is over there, next to the cone of shame.
post #20 of 92

I really can't stand Andy Rubin's face.

post #21 of 92
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post
Whats ip does apple own that google wants? 

 

That they wouldn't just steal outright, you mean?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #22 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

That they wouldn't just steal outright, you mean?

 

Who wants a Notification Shade? Let's nick it from El Goog!

post #23 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

That they wouldn't just steal outright, you mean?

I mean what ip does google want form Apple. You should take a look a jelly bean. Pinch to zoom, tap to zoom, slide to unlock, universal search all have been changed in a way that avoids apple patents. Google does not do anything with android until going over apple patents since ics. 

 

I know some of you don't know this but samsung does not equal android that google created. Samsung android and google android vastly different. Samsung is lazy.

post #24 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

If this goes anywhere, it'll end in a cross-licensing deal with no royalties paid either way--and that would be ultimately what a fan of iOS or Android would want.

As an Apple stock holder and fan, its not what I want.

 

No way.

 

I want iOS to be distinctive with Apple's technologies. If Google can just steal or license that freely, how is iOS different than Android and where is the innovation if they don't actually compete?

 

Necessity is the mother of innovation, and there is no necessity if you can't leverage your innovation to make more money than the next guy. At some point there will no more room for growth in smart phone sales from RIM losing share. Apple is going to have to get that share growth at the expense of Android and vice versa.

 

I don't see how they do that without distinct and proprietary differences which make iOS much better.

post #25 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


That would be the best outcome.
Talented as jobs was at CEO, I'm glad he's dead as his thermonuclear war against android was unrealistic. Hopefully cook is a lot more level headed in dealing with such issues.

Well, if he's not wishing that one of the most iconic, productive, transformative figures of our times is dead, he's already far more level-headed than you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


You're "glad he's dead"??
You can leave. The door is over there, next to the cone of shame.

Please.

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #26 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

 

Just because Google doesn't litigate based on their IP, you honestly, truly believe that Google owns absolutely nothing that Apple wants?

You don't think Google would litigate if i stole their search IP?

 

Google is a hypocrite. They complain about software patents and IP when it suits their PR needs and to make Android fans swoon. The truth is they own plenty of software patents they would aggressively sue over if Apple did they same as they do to Apple.

post #27 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post



Talented as jobs was at CEO, I'm glad he's dead

 

 

 

post #28 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarcoot View Post

As an Apple stock holder and fan, its not what I want.

 

No way.

 

I want iOS to be distinctive with Apple's technologies. If Google can just steal or license that freely, how is iOS different than Android and where is the innovation if they don't actually compete?

 

Necessity is the mother of innovation, and there is no necessity if you can't leverage your innovation to make more money than the next guy. At some point there will no more room for growth in smart phone sales from RIM losing share. Apple is going to have to get that share growth at the expense of Android and vice versa.

 

I don't see how they do that without distinct and proprietary differences which make iOS much better.

 

Your points are valid, but I was speaking more to the items that Google does own that they haven't held against Apple, that could possibly detract from iOS and/or Apple products.

 

Google owns a lot of patents of their own; if both Google and Apple were to sit down and say "here's what we have", both companies would have to change their products pretty dramatically.

post #29 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

 

Just because Google doesn't litigate based on their IP, you honestly, truly believe that Google owns absolutely nothing that Apple wants?

post #30 of 92
Originally Posted by majjo View Post
…I'm glad he's dead…

 

 

Leave.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #31 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarcoot View Post
 


Quote break your comment?

post #32 of 92
SOME OF THE THINGS APPLE MIGHT WANT FROM GOOGLE JUST IN CASE
 
 
Patent No. 5,883,580 “Geographic-temporal significant messaging”

This patent, issued on March 16th, 1999 talks about “messaging devices that process messages logically for a user in the context of space and time”. Translated from legalese – it’s about your iPhone being able to display geographically relevant messages when you are at a certain place. E.g. traffic alerts when you are near the congested intersection, ability to schedule reminders when you are approaching your workplace or leaving your home, getting a pop-up to remember to buy some milk when you are in a grocery store, etc;


Patent No. 5,922,047 “Apparatus, method and system for multimedia control and communication”

The ‘047 patent, issued on July 13, 199 is really broad and, according to Motorola, covers such basic device functionality as being able to launch and use any media application, while also being a phone. E.g. tapping on video player icon on iPhone 4S constitutes infringement, because it means that your phone switches to another operating mode (video player) among many (telephone, music player, browser, etc, in response to a first control signal (tapping on a video icon) and, after video player launches, it is controlled via multiple other control signals – e.g tap to Pause/Play, Fast Forward, etc;


Patent No. 6,425,002 “Apparatus and method for handling dispatching messages for various applications of a communication device”

‘002 patent was issued on July 23, 2002 and covers the API for routing incoming and outgoing messages to the correct applications. Motorola thinks that Apple’s Push Notification functionality, allowing your apps to automatically send and receive push messages, is covered by ththis patent and infringes on it.


Patent No. 6,493,673 “Markup language for interactive services and methods thereof”

This patent, issued on Dec. 10, 2002 covers interactive voice services delivered over the internet, and goes after Siri. Motorola does not care much about the artificial intelligence and all other fancy stuff Siri does. According to the patent claims, Motorola has invented the basic interactive dialog process Siri uses. And the way Apple renders XML files to allow you talk to Siri, is a no no without a license. “Siri, set a reminder for 2, tomorrow”, “2PM or 2AM”, “2PM” , “OK, setting reminder for 2PM on Wednesday, Aug. 22nd” . Doesn’t matter how Siri figures out what to ask and what to tell you. Simply by performing this dialog, and using a markup language to do it – Siri infringes. Or at least that’s what Motorola claims.


Patent No. 6,983,370 “System for providing continuity between messaging clients and method therefor”

The ‘370 patent, issued on January 3d, 2006 talks about seamless IM session switching between various devices, and says that all iMessage capable devices are infringing on it. Started your iMessage chat on your MacBook, then continued it on the way to work on your iPhone? Google says that the way Apple does this – by storing your chat data on its servers and then transferring the chat data from MacBook to iPhone – is Moto’s invention. This patent is also part of Motorola’s litigation with Microsoft in U.S.


Patent No. 7,007,064 “Method and apparatus for obtaining and managing wirelessly communicated content”

‘064 patent, issued on Feb 28, 2006 goes after e-mail syncing between your Macs and iOS devices via iCloud. It is a rather narrow patent, and only insists that the way Apple keeps your e-mails in sync, by deleting messages on one of your igadgets when you delete that same message on the other, is an infringing use.


Patent No. 7,383,983 “System and method for managing content between devices in various domains”

This patent covers the ability to pause video or audio playback on your iPad, and then resume playing the content from the same place on a different iDevice.
post #33 of 92

Hopefully Apple won't license much away to Google.

 

Fandroids act as if they have a right to use Apple's patents and innovations on their phones and tablets. Guess what, they don't.

 

If it were up to me, fandroids and other Apple haters would still be using nokia, blackberrys and other ancient technologies.

post #34 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Hopefully Apple won't license much away to Google.

 

Fandroids act as if they have a right to use Apple's patents and innovations on their phones and tablets. Guess what, they don't.

 

If it were up to me, fandroids and other Apple haters would still be using nokia, blackberrys and other ancient technologies.

 

You should probably look up one post from your own.

post #35 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


Those are the 7 Motorola patents in the new suit are they not? Has the ITC ruled on them yet? I honestly don't think they'll get an ban on Apple products based on them, nor do I think Motorola, even with Google's backing will pay the deposit necessary for an injunction.

 

What's the difference?

 

The argument is that Apple and Google would cross-license to resolve any issues, those included by the patents mentioned above, but many more as well. 

 

The real point is that both companies have things they each want, and cross-licensing would be one way to resolve that matter, while keeping everything in iOS and Android as it is.

post #36 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


Those are the 7 Motorola patents in the new suit are they not? Has the ITC ruled on them yet? I honestly don't think they'll get an ban on Apple products based on them, nor do I think Motorola, even with Google's backing will pay the deposit necessary for an injunction.

Yes they are and not the ITC has not. Why not? If apple can get an injuction for universal search on a mobile device anything can happen. 

post #37 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

 

You should probably look up one post from your own.

Let them take it to the courts, and we'll see what the outcome is.

post #38 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


No, no, I agree with you; cross licensing has been the status quo in the tech industry. Do you think that Apple began talking to google because of this suit?
I just think its unrealisitic to expect motorola being able to ban Apple products with this suit.
Likewise, it is unrealisitic to expect Apple to destroy Android though litigation (ie. Thermonucular war)

 

Yeah, we're on the same page.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Let them take it to the courts, and we'll see what the outcome is.

 

The topic at hand is cross-licensing to make agreements to prevent further unnecessary litigation. My comment to you was to show that there are, in fact, rights that Google controls that Apple uses and desires in not only iOS, but OS X, as equally as Apple has control of things Google wants. (Any player wants, really, Microsoft included, who already has licensing deals.)

It just goes to show that despite litigation that has happened and litigation that has not happened, there is a great many items that could be deliberated over, those included in this thread and many more--and it'd be beneficial to Apple, Google, and customers of either company, to reach a compromise.

post #39 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


Couple reasons:
1. I dont think Google can or is willing to put up the deposit necessary for an injunction
2. I don't think Google wants the backlash in bad PR from banning one of the most popular devices in the world.
3. I expect apple to settle if this case holds merit rather than risk an injunction

 

All are correct, as well as Google not traditionally wanting to litigate--which may change, given the ever-hostile landscape in tech recently.

 

It does make me think that cross-licensing agreements are more likely, though.

post #40 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


Couple reasons:
1. I dont think Google can or is willing to put up the deposit necessary for an injunction
2. I don't think Google wants the backlash in bad PR from banning one of the most popular devices in the world.
3. I expect apple to settle if this case holds merit rather than risk an injunction

1. If it meant the death of android, I think google would

2. Google can play that game "They are trying to kill us, telling us we can't make phones, self defense, we just want to exist in peace, and they wont talk to us" type of rhetoric. Apple has a higher market cap, but as far as brand power, and popularity google is on par. This will be Moto and Google(USA) vs. Apple(USA), not samsung

3. This is what i think will happen. I would prefer the patent office to get its act together and stop giving out patents like candy. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page