Google CEO: 'Anticompetitive' Apple, Microsoft forced Motorola deal

1234689

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    Don't you mean "no bearing"?



    Indeed I did, brain working faster than hands.
  • Reply 102 of 171
    I think Horace Didiu's observation that like mergers these deals rarely work out for any of the players concerned. I doubt they will have much impact on Apple, MS, and certainly Oracle [or MPEG and may Linux regarding license violations by Android makers] since these patents were enforceable and being enforced by Motorola prior to the buy out. The only real affect is that now Apple will directly sue Google as a manufacturer, something I am sure Google is looking forward towards and the Motorola lawyers have deeper pockets to mine at Google.
  • Reply 103 of 171
    srangersranger Posts: 473member
    Well,



    In the last couple of years, being able to defend against patent lawsuits is the single most importiant thing that you need to be able to do in the mobile wireless market. Google make a great move here. HTC, Samsung, and LG have to be happy about this move by Google. The reason is quite simple. It gives Google the tools necessary to defend Androind and it's hand set manufactures. Google wants more Android users, I doubt it will care if they are Motorola, HTC, Samsung, etc.... handsets.



    I know most Apple fans hate Google ( and there are good arguments why) but this move was necessary if Google wanted to keep Android alive....



    All major players have created this new climate in which the lawsuit reins supreme. All companies will have to live with the monster that they help to create......



    This is why I HATE these look and feel patents so much.......
  • Reply 104 of 171
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tawilson View Post


    Is Motorola that big in TV land? Never heard of that.



    Regardless of that fact, Google has bought "Motorola Mobility", NOT Motorola.



    I'd argue Motorola Mobility is NOTHING in TV land.



    Guess who makes a lot of set-top cable boxes:



    http://www.motorola.com/Video-Solutions/US-EN/Home



    They're one of the biggest set-top box OEMs in the world. I'll bet that this does more for Google TV than it does for Android (directly speaking).
  • Reply 105 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jetz View Post


    Guess who makes a lot of set-top cable boxes:



    http://www.motorola.com/Video-Solutions/US-EN/Home



    They're one of the biggest set-top box OEMs in the world. I'll bet that this does more for Google TV than it does for Android (directly speaking).



    Ah okay I stand corrected, again that is Motorola, not "Motorola Mobility" which is what Google bought.
  • Reply 106 of 171
    I'm thinking this means that Apple will be more likely to go after Interdigital's (IDCC) patent portfolio to strengthen its hand against Google & the portfolio owned by Motorola Mobility.
  • Reply 107 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post


    That would be an entirely unwarranted assumption, since the ROKR was built by Moto using IP from Apple. Far more likely Apple simply licensed their Fairplay system for use by Moto in that one handset and licensed the use of the iTunes trademark again for that limited use.



    Given the significant litigation between the two there is no evidence that either has wide ranging IP rights licensed from the other.



    Depending of course on which part of Moto actually holds the patents in question Motorola Mobility (the handset maker purchased by Google) or Motorola Solutions - the mobile technology parent that spun-off Moto Mob. My gut tells me that in the final analysis, that Moto Sol holds the key patents for mobile standards of which Apple already licenses any pertinent IP for use in their mobile devices.



    There is no indication that Moto Mob holds any of the IP for mobile services. There may be some IP around handset technologies that will benefit Google, but this has all the hallmarks of a panic buy by Google - given that Moto Mob was first being sold cheap by Moto Sol, and has struggled with producing market-leading Android handsets.
  • Reply 108 of 171
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post


    Patent exhaustion should mean that it does, though it will depend on the license terms - presumably Googorola will be making sure their license covers it.



    The Lodsys case is hard to argue from because a big part of Lodsys' position is that the developers shouldn't even have access to read Apple's license (which is covered by an NDA), so who the heck knows what it says.



    But let's play this out ...



    Suppose Apple or MSFT sues Google for patent infringement, Larry could wave the MOTO patents and say "tit for tat", which might be enough to create a detente. But can Larry repeat the same trick when Apple and MSFT knock on the doors of Samsung, HTC or any other Android licensee? How many times can you shoot the same bullet?



    Perhaps the winner emerging from this fray is Windows Phone. Regardless of their PR statements today, Samsung, HTC and LG would have to be foolish not to redouble their efforts on releasing WP handsets. In fact, MSFT is likely whispering in their *other* ear that they should do this sooner rather than later.
  • Reply 109 of 171
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    The CEO touted Motorola's history of building devices, saying he loved the company's StarTAC phone first launched 30 years ago.



    30 years ago? Really? Wikipedia says "StarTAC was released on 3 January 1996".
  • Reply 110 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post


    google is in a great position to screw their "partners" MS to the rescue



    google bit off more than it could chew, made some bad assumptions like java without permission and now they are weaker, does moto have java licenses?? ellison may have the last laugh, SJ has been laughin all along, now customers may be stuck with 2 year contracts and no updates and junk hardware.



    this all says that all this hyperbole from google just shows how much they got hammered.



    wow don't you guys find 12.5 billion excessive but survival costs dearly



    funny apple still has googleplex $$$$ in the bank and google is spending all theirs



    what's the ROI and break even point for google stockholders when you spend 12.5 billion to capture more ad revenue from mobile. ill keep an eye on the stock price.



    NOW apple needs to come out with its own search engine. wow



    Actually... I'd like to see Apple buy Vimeo. YouTube is starting to suck big time -- poor (or nonexistent) performance loaded with ads, pushy (ad-oriented) suggestions...
  • Reply 111 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Actually... I'd like to see Apple buy Vimeo. YouTube is starting to suck big time -- poor (or nonexistent) performance loaded with ads, pushy (ad-oriented) suggestions...



    YouTube has ads?



    Get AdBlock and ACleanerYouTube. All you see is the video. All the time.



    People tell me there are ads in YouTube videos now. Not just the popup ones at the bottom, but video ads before they play.



    And I never see them. Screw ads.
  • Reply 112 of 171
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,286member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tawilson View Post


    Ah okay I stand corrected, again that is Motorola, not "Motorola Mobility" which is what Google bought.



    The cable box business is part of Motorola Mobility and included in the purchase AFAIK.
  • Reply 113 of 171
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    But let's play this out ...



    Suppose Apple or MSFT sues Google for patent infringement, Larry could wave the MOTO patents and say "tit for tat", which might be enough to create a detente. But can Larry repeat the same trick when Apple and MSFT knock on the doors of Samsung, HTC or any other Android licensee? How many times can you shoot the same bullet?



    It's too late for detente, because shots have already been fired. At some point the current litigation between Apple & Moto/Goog will be decided, and then will be in one of the following cases



    Apple infringe on Moto, Google will be in a strong position to demand whatever cross licensing deal they like, along with royalties

    Moto infringe on Apple, Apple will be able to shut Moto out of the US for whatever models infringe and force Google to redevelop or remove features to stop infringing

    Both infringe the other - some sort of cross licensing deal will be needed.



    You only need to shoot the bullet once if you get a good enough peace treaty the first time.
  • Reply 114 of 171
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by habi View Post






    What will htc and samsung say about this???



    Quotes from Android partners:



    “We welcome today’s news, which demonstrates Google’s deep commitment to defending Android, its partners, and the ecosystem.”



    – J.K. Shin

    President, Samsung, Mobile Communications Division





    “I welcome Google‘s commitment to defending Android and its partners.”



    – Bert Nordberg

    President & CEO, Sony Ericsson





    “We welcome the news of today‘s acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem.”



    – Peter Chou

    CEO, HTC Corp.





    “We welcome Google‘s commitment to defending Android and its partners.”



    – Jong-Seok Park, Ph.D

    President & CEO, LG Electronics Mobile Communications Company



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





    Apparently, Google talked to the OEMs before making this announcement.
  • Reply 115 of 171
    Mmmm...



    The mind Boggles -- the Google Bondoogles Boondoggle...



    ... Out here havin' fun... In the warm California sun...
  • Reply 116 of 171
    Thinkin' out loud here...



    Supposedly, Amazon has (or is going to) fork Android for its own tablets.



    Since Android is open source, couldn't Amazon license the Java bits from Oracle, then relicense the whole thing to Sammy, HTC, etc...



    This would be mutually beneficial -- supporting the manufacturers, reselling their hardware and providing a store/infrastructure/ecosystem to support apps/developers/content/sales -- with or without ads.
  • Reply 117 of 171
    pokepoke Posts: 506member
    So, to recap, Google wants us to believe it just spent the equivalent of 2 years profits on an unprofitable mobile company that primarily sells dumbphones in order to secure patents to defend the mobile platform it gives away for free (to indirectly generate mobile ad revenue) even though it's not being directly sued over anything the patents could defend it against anyway and is still going to run that company independently and keep producing hardware. Oh, and its hardware partners think it's an awesome development!



    There isn't a single step in this strategy that makes an ounce of sense.
  • Reply 118 of 171
    here:

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



    Paraphrasing the full commentary sent to them by Larry to ensure a unified alliance response:



    "We welcome the news of today?s acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem. Today, we celebrate the first glorious victory in the Android Protection Directives. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure open ideology ? where each handset may bloom, secure from the pests purveying closed and proprietary systems. Our Androidification of handsets is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one OS, with one alliance, one ad-revenue generating search engine, one cause. Our enemies shall sue themselves to death, and we will bury them with their own confusion. We shall prevail!"



    Closed is the new Open. Anti-competitive is the new defense. We shall sue to end suing. We shall acquire IP to prevent the acquisition of IP. We shall ensure equality by making our handsets more equal than the others - as a shining example of what conformity to our openness should look like.
  • Reply 119 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post


    So they buy up a competitor (anticompetitive), which gives them now first-class priority amongst Android licensees (anticompetitive), and they do it just for the patents (anticompetitive), and they say Apple and Microsoft are being anticompetitive?



    Remember the golden rule of Google: when someone else does it, it is evil. When Google does it, it is not evil. Just like a religion.
  • Reply 120 of 171
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    30 years ago? Really? Wikipedia says "StarTAC was released on 3 January 1996".



    He of course means the DynaTAC, from 1983
Sign In or Register to comment.