Nortel Networks, the bankrupt Canadian telecom company, came that much closer to disappearing completely yesterday with the cash sale of its portfolio of 6000 patents for $4.5 billion to a consortium of companies including Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, Research In Motion (RIM), and Sony. The bidding, which began with a $900 million offer from Google, went far higher than most observers expected and only ended, I’m guessing, when Google realized that Apple and its partners had deeper pockets and would have paid anything to win. This transaction is a huge blow to Google’s Android platform, which was precisely the consortium’s goal.
Google is the youngest of these companies and has probably the smallest patent portfolio, most of which isn’t mobile or telecom related. This puts Google and Android at a legal disadvantage and explains the 45 patent infringement suits that one analyst says Google in presently facing in the mobile area alone.
Google would have preferred to win the auction, but with the consortium sitting on more than $100 billion in cash, the outcome came down to determination, not resources. Google stayed in it only long enough to make sure of the consortium’s intentions and to make the purchase more painful for them, if that mattered.
It certainly mattered to Google, because that $4.5 billion number will be at the heart of the inevitable anti-trust lawsuit Google will file almost immediately. Every good anti-trust lawyer in America just cancelled his or her July 4th holiday to prepare their pitch for Google, which will probably claim Restraint of Trade as well.
Given that the courts will shortly be involved, Google can probably operate unfettered for another 2-3 years, during which they’ll try to build their own mobile patent portfolio. Google may well be able to use the courts to slow the actual Nortel transaction, too, according to my lawyer friends.
So the “Android is dead” story here is way premature.
In the long run, remember, Google will probably be able to use its legal strategy to force the consortium to at least license some or all of the patents. They’ll get a royalty from Google, I suppose, and thus benefit from Android’s success, but then Google is unlikely to be completely deterred, either.
The story everyone seems to be missing here is who gets what in this consortium deal? Most journalists and bloggers seem to assume the winners will all share equally in the IP spoils. But I have people who know people and the word I am hearing it that’s not the way the consortium works at all.
Some consortium members get patents, some get royalties, and some just get freedom from having to pay royalties.
Notice Nokia isn’t in the consortium? The Finnish company is apparently covered by Microsoft, tying Nokia even more firmly to Windows Phone.
Here’s the consortium participation as I understand it. RIM and Ericsson together put up $1.1 billion with Ericsson getting a fully paid-up license to the portfolio while RIM, as a Canadian company like Nortel, gets a paid-up license plus possibly some carry forward operating losses from Nortel, which has plenty of such losses to spare. For RIM the deal might actually have a net zero cost after tax savings, which the Canadian business press hasn’t yet figured out.
Microsoft and Sony put up another $1 billion.
There is a reportedly a side deal for about $400 million with EMC that has the storage company walking with sole ownership of an unspecified subset of the Nortel patents.
Finally Apple put up $2 billion for outright ownership of Nortel’s Long Term Evolution (4G) patents as well as another package of patents supposedly intended to hobble Android.
At the end of the day this deal isn’t about royalties. It is about trying to kill Android.
Note — Here’s a pretty good account from Reuters of the Nortel patent auction. You’ll notice they don’t include the participation breakdown of the winning bid (who gets what) that so far appears no place but here.
This seems to make it more likely that GOOG could just buy out RIMM, pick up the patents (plus many more) and sell off the hardware assets (or implement Android on RIMM devices)
If Google with H-P made a play for Research In Motion, it would be the bloodiest costliest takeover bid in mobile history .
That would be a very foolish thing for Google to do. It may make sense for patents, but in no other way.
Suddenly Google is a phone maker, not just a smart phone software provider. The Android thing is not at all about making money or phones. It is about making a competitors product a commodity, and keeping someone else from controlling location and search data. That is the GOOG goldmine.
Second, RIM’s culture of an enterprise provider would collide head on with Google’s smartest people in the room culture. The two companies would never integrate in any real way, and the energy lost infighting will drain both companies.
Still, they may do the M&A. We have certainly seen dumber moves in the corporate world.
EXACTLY what I was thinking. If this purchase goes though, Google should make a play for RIM…and scoop up their part of the benefits.
If there’s a logical acquirer here for RIM it is Microsoft, NOT Google.
Ballmer doesn’t have the brains to buy RIM. But Nokia didn’t know what they have in patents and gave themselves away to Microsoft. Poisoned waterhole to prevent others buying them. At the same time that Microsoft are still struggling to fit Windows in to a pocket phone, whereas Apple have the right idea in a full desktop OS and smaller one for portability based upon how you would use the device.
MS are doomed to fail unless someone other than Ballmer takes charge. We’ve got someone called “Jordan” in the UK who could do a better job!
As someone who used a Blackberry for 10+ years and recently switched to Win7 phone (HTC Trophy, Verizon), I think there’s a very real opportunity for MS to take a lot of market share from RIM without having to pay for it. The Win7 OS has better, and in my view a much more elegant interface for dealing with Outlook email and office apps. Personally I think RIM is already dead, they just don’t know it yet.
Usually with consortium like this, they generally have predetermined arrangement on what each member can and cannot do with those patents in terms of transfer of ownership.
The name of the game is not just about owning the patent but also to keep it out of the hands of specific players. Since Apple was the dominant player and the other 5 member consortium ended up joining Apple to stay in the game, Apple likely had more control over the final terms.
As such I’m sure there were plenty of clause in their contract to make sure that their common enemy Google will not be able to get its hand on these patents easily.
or they could just wait a few more years, continue doing what they are doing, and then bid again at the RIM liquidation auction
It seems to me that you wrote an “oh, poor of me they trying to kill me” Android idioticy.
Google has not the guts to put money behind its words.
Google knows from the beginning that Android is a fake-free solution, just with Dalvik et als.
They just do “bravatos” to seem they are behind Android-at-full, but they are not stupids.
I did not understand one word you said, was that English or spam?
When elephants dance, the little guy always gets stepped on.
Best of luck Google. Android is pretty great and I personally would love to see more pressure on Apple to innovate iOS which is lodged in conventional methodologies. (I am an iPhone user, loving its simpleness, hating its staleness).
There is really only room in the market for 3 major players and RIM is nearly dead anyway. It would be a shame to see WinPhone beat Android on a technicality. Does anyone aspire to cary windows on their pocket… Zune player… Nokia leftover designs… Balmer screaming ring tone… anyone… anyone? MS hasn’t had a classy desirable product since, well, ever, but they aren’t opposed to a fight.
If Google puts enough horsepower behind Android it should stay alive but at what cost? Maybe its just inevitable the new boy in school gets picked on but eventually punches the bully in the nose.
This is about to get interesting.
Is 500,000 android activations each and every day enough horsepower for you?? It’ll be 1M/day very soon…………
And if all those activations are ripe for litigation. . . its all useless. Take the wheels off a Ferrari and its just a boat anchor. If Apple neuters Google in court, Android also becomes a boat anchor. Love or hate ’em Steve Jobs and co. takes pleasure in proving a point. At this point no one can call an advantage to either company, but I really hope when the dust settles that innovation and creative competition is not the unfortunate victim. If we are going to be forced to buy $600 radios, I want a G.D. choice.
“Does anyone aspire to cary windows on their pocket”. I don’t have to aspire since I’ve been doing just that since 2007…first Vista Ultimate, then Windows 7 Ultimate since 2009. (www.oqo.com). Why bother with multiple devices that have to be synced to each other when one will do it all? Looking forward to Windows 8 and Intel’s faster processors to improve performance and add voice phone calls to the current Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/3G data conectivity.
This may hurt Google than just on Android. Google is branching out in many directions and probably made one too many enemies. Google’s Android partners aren’t completely settled in the Android space. The money isn’t there, and they don’t like the way Google has treated them. (Lesson #1: You don’t compete with your partners, and you try not to screw them over) and Android is beginning to have malware issues. Heck, it even has more malware issues than Microsoft’s Windows 7 Phone OS.
Google is attempting to reach out in the Social Space, transaction space, and many other technology spaces. Many of these patents will affect Google’s other projects.
The sad part is that Google could have been everyone’s favorite buddy and raked in the dough. No one would have cared. Now, that Google is gunning after you, you might want to think twice about depending upon Google. You said that Apple’s data center is way too big for just iCloud. How about Search and Maps? If I was Apple, I’d be doing my best to get Google apps off of iOS as “default apps”.
…and they could scoop their QNX OS and BBM as well…I’m talking myself into a RIM buy being a good thing…
Cringely has painted Apple as a cold-blooded assassin – first they were killing Windows with iCloud, now they’re killing Android with this. Maybe they are more like an angry mother lion protecting her cubs….
Funny how a near death experience will do that to you.
Google’s just about reached that point where they’re no longer everyone’s sweetheart, will skin a knee, and must learn how to move past it.
Business is war. I get the impression that Apple thinks they were backstabbed by Google with Android, especially with the Nexus One. They were the first that to market with an iOS competitor and their CEO, who was on Apple’s board, had access to the iPhone. Jobs has also said that the intent behind the group developing Android was to kill iOS.
HP is the current collector of dying technology companies. I’ve been expecting them to make a play for RIM. They stand to gain the most from RIM’s hardware and patent portfolio. And RIM is dead meat.
Google doesn’t need RIM’s hardware or software business, but they do need the patents for defensive purposes. That will be an ongoing problem, but killing off a competitor would be bad for the consortium’s own businesses. Death from a thousand cuts would be more inline with what is coming.
Still, I don’t see Android being hobbled that much. Comptetion will ramp up from all sides, but there are enough vendors in the camp to blunt much of the onslaught.
Bob, I am curious to see that Motorola is not listed in the consortium, and I didn’t see any evidence that they were a bidder.
Is this because the Nortel IP comprises a lot of technology that was originally from Motorola and that Motorola doesn’t want or need, or has the mobile half of the modern day animated corpse of Motorola really abandoned any pretense of competing on technology? Or some other reason?
I don’t think Motorola has that kind of cash, plus they are an Android licensee and were relying on Google to do it for them.
Motorola every now and again bring out something spectacular. The StarTAC, the RAZR phone etc. But then nothing. They were the ones who should have invented the iPhone, and let’s be honest everything was there before Apple did it, just that Jobs had the vision to bring all those ideas together. Motorola don’t have the management to drive forward new ideas.
Having seen Motorola from the inside in the UK for both mobiles and semiconductors it’s partly clear that once a product is designed no further work to bring out the next version, or to expand upon it, is ever thought of.
If Motorola had done the iPhone it would still be 2G with WiFi only. With suggestions of a 3G next year with as much as 4GB of memory on it next year! Although it would have the ability to run Flash it would not have the processor speed to within your lifetime!
How the mighty have fallen, and the weapons of war perished.
After the failure of Iridium, Motorola’s executives lost their ability to make decisive, conclusive decisions. The fear of failure led to exactly the situation you describe, Dr. John – deep, rich engineering talent coming up with all kinds of innovative ideas, powerful products, serious solutions, etc., but no one with the vision or will at the top to push them into the market. Too busy fighting the other sectors and groups.
Before they built the network I was asked not to attend an Iridium meeting as I was only a sponsored student (doing my PhD.) but got to see all the other technical stuff. However, when I found out what it was I couldn’t believe the amount of money they were putting in! It was so obvious that making a call wasn’t that important to recoup the investment.
It was a time where GSM was really starting to take off, and traditional satellite calls were hugely expensive. But the writing was easily on the wall and you could see how much cheaper GSM phones and calling was going to become.
I can think of one simple response.
Create an excellent android platform – hardware and software
and then do not sell it in the usa.
Explain to all the android users in the us exactly why they are getting the third world version compared to Europe / India / Asia / Russia / China / S. America.
307 million people live in the us
6468 million people do not.
As a market, it’s importance is overstated, and with restraints on progress like this, the rest of the world will move on past.
I’m glad to see somebody else figured this out.
One of Nokia’s former battle cries was — look how strong we are outside the U.S.! Look at where they are now.
The other problem with that strategy is — depriving (or ceding) one inconsequential market, as you put it, means nothing to the other markets where competition continues unabated.
Yes, Nokia. The Nokia analogy is backwards: Nokia is a foreign company seeking to dominate the US market, not the other way around. Also, Nokia’s prices are significantly higher than an Android phone’s. Its only one company with fewer development resources than an open group. Anybody can make Android hardware and develop software (200,000 apps and counting). Android, Open Handset Alliance, is like the open architecture of the PC. That’s why the PC dominates: everybody gets a piece of the pie. So too with the Android I think.
Oh, and did yall see the Google bid prices? They were all figures based on obscure scientific constants. I don’t think Google was too serious about the Nortel portfolio. They could put up a hell of a legal defense with $4 billion anyway.
I don’t think it works that way because of treaties.
From Wikipedia…
” The desire to further restrict the possibility of compulsory licenses for patents has led to provisions in recent bilateral US trade agreements.”
” It is one thing for states to have intellectual property laws on their statutes, and another for governments to enforce them aggressively.”
I wouldn’t bet my business model on world enforcement of patents. Other than France as an example there is little evidence that many nations, say in Asia which has the preponderance of the world’s population, would help in patent enforcement. In reality, its in most of these countries interest to NOT enforce them.
Of course, I could be completely wrong.
Maybe I missed your point but it seems to me that these days patents for world-wide products are international (as previously stated, due to treaties). So the patent fights should continue regardless of which country has which product.
software patents are not legal in Europe (yet)
In that case, wouldn’t they be protected by copyright laws? That would involve the big guns…music and movie publishers.
Bob
Your math adds up to $5.5 B rather than $4.5 B.
1.1+1+2+0.4=4.5 at my house
+1
I’m pretty sure I read that the Justice Dept. cleared Apple (antiTrust wise) to enter the bidding – Wouldn’t this negate Google going after them with lawsuits.
Apple has not sued Google yet as far as I recall, won’t they just keep going after the handset manufacturers like HTC, Samsung etc.?
I usually *read* these columns, for today for some reason I chose to listen to the audio podcast.
Bob – do you always record your podcasts at a construction site? Or perhaps the table saws, sanders, and other tools in the background were meant to symbolize Google constructing its strategy?
I’ll re-record it tonight after the carpenters leave. They are installing a new hot tub, of course!
Ah…now we learn the real reason for the return to California.
Combo of David W and especially Doug. And, what was that, Powey Kieth? May want to check again. 4.5. You may be misinterpreting the “Microsoft and Sony put up another $1 billion.” That is a total from the two of 1B.
I think the real story here is how screwed up the patent system is to allow thousands broad, vague, obvious, and trivial patents in the first place. Hundreds (thousands?) of companies will now be extorted into paying for protection once this portfolio of legal nuclear weapons is released, despite having independently developed technology years ago.
Hey Cringely, any comments on the Lodsys or Macrosolve patent mess? Or the “patent reform” now being voted on?
Here’s a Who’s Who of the most innovative, capable and yes, powerful technology companies on the planet, putting up good money to buy rights to use or own patents.
I’d say it’s proof that the value of intellectual property has been reaffirmed as extremely relevant. I certainly don’t see how you find it “screwed up.”
I note that the portfolio included mention of the LTE (4G) technology. Perhaps you could use it as an example, because you obviously are expert in this area, to show how patents about squeezing more data across wireless channels are “vague.” Again, all the bidders apparently thought these patents were good enough as to be worth billions if they ever had to use them in a court of law.
The bidders did think patents were valuable according to the rules to the current system, but that is because current system is broken. Any “practitioner skilled in the art” in any industry can point to dozens of junk patents issued daily. Patent trolls are a genuine threat to innovation and economic innovation.
By the way, you infringed on the Lodsys and Macrosolve (ridiculous) patents by entering your comment on the http://www.cringley.com – I hope you and Cringley don’t get sued!
Okay, now we understand
patents applicability -> for big/rich companies only.
patents objective -> to kill off innovation
good system
LOL
Google really has become the new Microsoft. Finds the need to battle every successful tech company. Reactive. Defensive. Every partner looking for the exits. United companies whose only common interest is that google is challenging their core businesses. (Much akin to the US and Soviet Union becoming allies in WW II.)
Apple is slowly eating away at MS’ core business (Windows) and yet MS (correctly) sees Google as a bigger threat.
And the company that gives products away to destroy competition is going to try to make anti-trust claims?? Oh well nice work for the lawyers.
Wow. Just wow.
Keep an eye on 2 public companies: Interdigital (IDCC) and Tessera (TSRA). I suspect both will be targeted by the companies that were bidding on the Nortel portfolio. Specifically IDCC which has a very large 4g portfolio that some speculate is worth more than Nortels.
I feel like I missed the context here, how does acquisition of a Canadian telco advance or suppress the fate of Android?
Nortel was not a telco (not a telephone company) but a maker of telephone and other communication equipment. They competed with a broad range of companies from Lucent to Cisco. What’s being acquired here isn’t Nortel but Nortel’s patent portfolio.
What a waste. Ref. Shakespear: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
I was going to say the same thing until I remebered by brother is one. I think the lawyers and the legal system exist to the same extent as laws exist. What we need is fewer laws. Let’s go back to the 10 commandments and start over from there.
RIM a license and Apple owns the patents.
Is it a sure thing that the license is transferable should RIM be bought?
If Google did get RIM’s license. Would that result in a license for Samsung?
For Apple, this is about operating freely though perhaps with an occasional cross license. It in all probability is a hammer on the “copyist”.
Being able to build and market something should depend on skill and expertise alone not how big your “patent portfolio” is. This sad story is just another indication of how terminally broken the commercial world is. Sadder still is the way you people talk as if all this nonsense is normal. Stupid humans!
Considering the anti-consortium, highly politicised and divisive approach Google adopted on the acquisition of WebM, maybe it’s for the best that such unlikely bedfellows as Microsoft, RIM, Apple and Ericsson acquired the Nortel patents.
However, expect further patent litigation as cross-licensing deals are torn up in the wake of technologies being brought in-house by the winners, and more “shake-downs” a la Microsoft on Android licensees ensue.
Hold on to your hats, ladies and gentlemen!
[…] Cringely notes the breakdown of these patent acquisitions, and notes Apple paid $2 billion to purchase […]
Let’s see, Google is thought to make ~$10 per Android, while Apple makes around ~$410 per iPhone. With estimates of 150 million Androids in 2011 vs 100 million iPhones it is pretty clear who has the money to win these kind of fights.
Think about it this way. Google has to move 90 million Androids to pay for that patent bid, while Apple only needed to move 4.8 million iPhones to actually get the patents.
Wow. This is all very confusing but also exciting to follow. It is hard to argue with Matt’s point. And, it is hard to argue against Cringely who informs quite well. As a novice techie and complete outsider, my general observations along with gathered but not substantiated fact, is that Google is indeed in the crosshairs of the big boys who play with loaded guns (cash) and often the old boy network can team up to be very powerful in the form of prevention: ie not letting a newbie play in their world, especially one that is a threat. To me it is playground economics. I’m not routing for or against anyone, just watching the same thing that went down in middle school happen all over again…
Google did not appear to take this patent auction seriously:
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/02/apple-takes-the-patent-wars-seriously-google-not-so-much/?section=magazines_fortune
Quoting “three people with direct knowledge of the situation,” Reuters reported late Friday that Google was making bids that were literally irrational — using numbers like Brun’s constant (1.902160540…), the Meissel-Mertens constant (0.2614972128…) and, when they got permission to go past the $3 billion limit, pi (3.14159…).
“Google was bidding with numbers that were not even numbers,” one of the Reuters’ sources said.
That may have impressed the math majors at Stanford, but it had no effect on the deadly serious businessmen they were bidding against. Apple (AAPL), having just settled a 20-month legal battle with Nokia (NOK) and facing a potential import ban in its epic struggle with Samsung, was particularly determined. In the end it was they who led the consortium that shelled out $4.5 billion for Nortel’s 6,000 patents — the largest sum, by far, ever paid for a collection of intellectual properties.
I thought Android was the hands down winner too . . . but I’m not sure anymore. It all depends on which way China goes. If China goes Android, Google wins. If China goes for the iPhone et al. Apple wins.
China is crazy about the iPhone. And Google is being careless. You don’t win a serious battle by treating it as a lark . . . at least not more than once you don’t . . .
http://blogs.computerworld.com/18517/apple_crazy_china_will_become_biggest_iphone_market
I don’t think if Android wins in China it will be good for Google because the Chinese phones will run Android forks that pass data to Baidu. Android is actually a spectacularly bad strategy for China.
Google says Android is profitable . . . but I don’t see how. You are not obligated to download android apps from google. It must be on the assoicated ad revenue . . . which is not the same thing as “Android is profitable”.
A while back (like 1999) I had what I thought was a great idea for input on a hand held device that was all screen. Instead of pressing directly on a touch screen, the sensor would be on the back of the device. I tried it. With something that small, it’s easy to accurately touch a point on the back of the device directly across from a desired location displayed on the front. You cradle the “tablet” / game boy / whatever in your hands, thumbs on the front, and all you other fingers on the back. The screen doesn’t get smudged.
Guess what? Nortel already had a patent on it.
[…] to Mark Stephens, who writes under the byline Robert X. Cringely, the cost — and the spoils — were split as […]
Dear Robert,
How can Google claim monopoly when they have the most of the market share and they lost on the bid fair & square?
Don’t be silly.
Also, it’s time Android makers respect IP and start paying up for innovations that others have created and Google has stolen & copied.
Android’s rise will come to a screeching halt in the next 6 months. It’s all over!
Dave
>Android makers respect IP
>Android’s rise will come to a screeching halt
Yes, Robert. Excellent point: IP blocks innovation. I agree (and consider it a Bad Thing).
Not Robert. David.
The “Android” is the target logic would make sense if any claims in the Nortel portfolio actually read on the OS; but they don’t. Most of these are purely hardware/firmware claims that the handset maker would be implementing at a lower level as part of the protocols. Google doesn’t “make” anything that is a big target; its more the T-mobiles, HTCs, etc., that are at risk, not Google. IMO this portfolio was not bought to bother Android-based phones,but, rather, as protection $$ to make sure it didn’t go to some monster NPE that would turn around and sue Apple and MSFT for $10b.
“JNG says:
July 2, 2011 at 8:09 am
The “Android” is the target logic would make sense if any claims in the Nortel portfolio actually read on the OS;…..”
@JNG
Thank you, this was my first thought after reading Cringely’s article. I would also believe most of the LTE, probably all, either do now or will come under FRAND licensing.
I take this as a completely defensive maneuver by the members of the winning consortium to suppress patent trolls and to provide a means of backing up cross licensing with other (read Nokia) FRAND licensees.
The only threat I see to Google is Oracle, who is suing over software, but I don’t have a clue as to the merits of their lawsuit.
That’s interesting and may well be valid except I talked to people from companies in the winning consortium who confirmed that Android was the main target. That doesn’t mean, however, that there can be only one target.
Bob said a while back that all Apple hardware is basically a dongle that will let you run some Apple software.
Google has NO CASE against filing an anti-trust lawsuit against Apple.
After all, there are more Android phones than iPhones.
Apple NEVER has a monopoly in any market.
I think there’s a more accurate way of looking at this. This consortium stopped Google from acquiring these patents. The goal isn’t to “kill” Android. The goal is to stop Google from acquiring patents to protect its own blatant patent infringement. Google was the bad guy in this scenario. A company responsible for no innovation in the telecoms space – a company that has copied other products with blatant disregard for the IP of companies that actually spent the time and money to develop innovative products – was going to simply BUY patents from a defunct telecoms company in order to defend itself in court. Google is no better than a patent troll and this auction was a huge win for real innovation.
Google is an advertising company that cynically acquired a mobile OS and then blatantly ripped off the UI of another mobile OS all so it could destroy value in the market in the hope of being able to display its ads unfettered. This is very similar to how Microsoft went after Netscape by making Internet Explorer free except on a much broader scale. Indeed, Google’s playbook has been very similar to Microsoft’s recently; they aim to destroy value in markets in order to ensure their cash cow – ads – is the only way to make money there. It’s really Google that needs to be investigated for Android; a product clearly aimed at harming competitors above all else.
These patents don’t help Apple et al sue Google but they would have helped Google file countersuits against people suing them. This is a big win by real innovators against a company that has quickly positioned itself as the new bad guy in the tech industry. The only disappointing thing is that there are still so many people who believe Google’s propaganda. Here’s a clue: if somebody has to tell you their motto is “don’t be evil,” they’re about to screw you.
The first two paragraphs can be read with “Google” replaced by “Apple”. Still makes sense since cell phone technology started at Bell Labs in the 60’s, radio technology started with Marconi, and digital with Morse.
None of the sentences would make sense if you replace “Google” with “Apple.” Apple is an innovator. Beyond being a phone, the iPhone was a wholly original product. Apple isn’t an ad company. They don’t give iOS away for free. They aren’t using Microsoft’s playbook. What on Earth are you talking about?
Both innovate, neither invent.
Correction…Google has come up with a pretty useful search algorithm for the web; I use Google every day but have not had the need for Apple products except possibly Quicktime when it was the only way to view some video formats.
Apple and Microsoft are not going after Google directly. They have a better set of targets – the Android licensees. These companies are now running scared as they expected Google to mother and protect them. For Microsoft this means that they either shift the OEMs more towards WP7 (e.g. Samsung) or they extract licence fees anyway (Velocity Micro being the latest). Microsofts goal is to level the playing field so that there is no cost advantage to Android over WP7. Ironically, the Android “fee” goes to MS. Apple, on the other hand, is playing a different game. It is protecting it’s cash cow for the future with it’s most abundant commodity – cash. The LTE patents provide not only freedom to operate, but hedge against any of the long in the tooth operators (they’d rather not do another Nokia deal). Apple, like Google, is new to the telecom game, yet have even more at stake for the fundamentals of wireless technologies.
Lastly, Samsung just got beached like a whale. Apple is playing the long game.
I like that whale image. With Samsung supposedly dropping its patent suit against Apple you have to wonder if something huge isn’t happening there. Maybe Apple canceled its $5.7 billion in orders with Samsung…
Per FOSSpatents, they’re not dropping anything, just consolidating.
Call it want you want but they’re not longer suing Apple for infringement in the US, only the EU. Perhaps they realized they’re going to lose or they made a deal with Apple to keep the fab business. For all we know, Apple’s suit against Samsung was a move to put the heat on Samsung to sweeten the fab deal.
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco […]
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco […]
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco […]
[…] [Reuters, TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco @FOSSpatents] […]
Apple is only buying itself protection from the annoying stupid patents like the ON SWITCH … Apple generally does not go around suing people unless it’s pretty blatant (like Samsungs recent phone designs) … if Apple were Kodak & desperate for cash, they would clearly sue Google & Schmidt for using priviliedged information but instead Apple will crush Android the old fashioned way – by making better phones and more money (notice that Android has added no new features in the last year since they cannot see what Apple is doing? Or that Android tablets have sold in the thousands?) … but this is insurance for Apple from the patent trolls who somehow were previously able to patent things like “a device to telecommuncate that you can hold in your hand.”
Surely it’s only a matter of time before the patents system is dramatically shaken-up. It clearly isn’t working the way it was supposed to. When that happens it could cause most of these patents to be worthless.
It never worked. Pharmaceuticals ? Independent (as opposed to the industry funded ones) show no benefits. And pharmaceuticals were the supposed to be the poster child for the benefits of patents to stimulate innovation.
[…] […]
[…] Posted July 2, 2011 by A Simple Village Undertaker in The Enemy of My Enemy. Tagged: Android, Apple, Cringley, Google, I, iPhones, Nortel, Ray Visotski. Leave a Comment Bob Cringley comes up with some pretty interesting observations. Here is one of them….The Enemy of My Enemy […]
“It is about trying to kill Android.”
I have tried, but failed, to see why a consortium of tech companies can use patents over LTE and such to kill a software package that doesn’t per se use those patents.
Perhaps Android OEMs will have to license the patents; this would add a few dollars to a handset. Mostly, I see figures like $15 for a WP7 license; maybe there’s another $25–$50 for the various ARM, radio and other licenses. We’re talking ~ 10% of the cost of a smartphone.
None of which is paid by Google. The very capable Android software MAY infringe some of Apple’s UI patents — the double-click to zoom-to-frame, for instance — and need to be removed. And the Oracle case lumbers along, with damages proposed along the lines of a similar amount per phone. I can’t understand why a $15/copy fee is a problem when somebody signs a 2-year carrier contract for $2000. Will OEMs choose to pay Google the new $15/handset cost versus paying Microsoft $15? Quite likely, like HTC, they will want to offer a range of equipment to consumers, who will not see the cost difference.
Maybe some OEMs are close to the edge, and bearing these costs will not be possible. But I’m just not understanding how this is life-and-death… especially for Google.
Think of it this way: if I cut off your legs, how would you run? It’s the same with an OS.
Google has another more immediate problem: Oracle.
Love them or hate them Larry Ellison is convinced that their Java IP has been infringed by Google’s Android and they are looking for retribution. Forget about the consortium; Oracle will keep them under fire for years!
Java. Why couldn’t Google replace Java with, say, PHP?
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco […]
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco @FOSSpatents]Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheIphoneBlog/~3/uK2CR-arOcA/ […]
[…] TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco […]
[…] to Mark Stephens, who writes underneath a byline Robert X. Cringely, a cost — and a booty — were separate as […]
I don’t really think Ericsson and Sony would want to be part of a plan to kill off Android. They kinda are using it for building cell phones in Sony Ericsson.
Sure, now Apple won’t sue them but if the Android ecosystem suffers, so do they. Also, Ericsson has a stake in ST-Ericsson which are building cell phone platform. These platforms are not in the iPhone (Qualcomm instead?) and they would also suffer if the market share of Android would decline. And Sony’s doing Android tablets.
So rather than killing Android I think Apple is just taxing Android and protecting themselves against being sued by others (or at least that is what the rest of the consortium thinks). Since they are so new in the cell phone industry they probably have a pretty week portfolio. Not long ago they themselves had to pay the Nokia tax. They probably don’t want to be put in that position again. They are not in so different a from Google after all.
And now Sony and Ericsson just bought themselves licenses up front so they don’t have to pay a per unit license it sounds like given your information.
Of course, Ericsson is selling a boatload of LTE networks (Verizon, AT&T, TeliaSonera and so on – more than half of the 200 million LTE users are surfing via ///-networks) so they would have needed to pay a lot of cash anyways for the use.
PS To amend your information, Ericsson paid $340 million USD and RIM $770 million USD according to their press releases. (Of course suming up to your value of $1.11 billion USD
I’m wondering about another consortium here.
The Open Handset Alliance was created to support (and presumably protect) the Android platform.
https://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html
With 82 technology companies involved, would they scare up some patents for defensive purposes?
Players like Synaptics, NTT, LG, NEC, Samsung, Toshiba, Alcatel, Motorola, Texas Instruments and Qualcomm can’t be short of IP.
Interesting that Sony is part of the consortium that won the Nortel bid, and are also a member of the OHA.
I wonder about the Open Handset Alliance aspect as well…
Android is open source!
http://source.android.com/source/index.html
My understanding is that “Android” was started by Google based on Linux and other open source code.
Google’s influences are the “Android Marketplace”, the “Android” trademark (?) and “Google apps for Android” as well as the fact that Google is ( I assume) contributing the most to the Android code base. Any others?
Given that, how much of this would Google be liable for? Despite many people’s assumptions they don’t seem to sell or license “Android”.
Notice who’s getting sued… the members exposed to legal action seem to be the ones actually selling “Android”, the handset manufacturers ( or maybe in the future the end users themselves).
Oracle’s lawsuit over the Dalvik bytecode interpreter (also open source) is different somehow?
p.s. Go check out the Android link above… does it mention Google anywhere at all?
>>You’ll notice they don’t include the participation breakdown of the winning bid (who gets what) that so far appears no place but here.<<
Pardon me if I'm missing something Bob, but if no one else is reporting on the bid breakdown, where did you get the info? Any external resources you can point us to?
Nope. My sources are internal in this case and the reason they’ll talk to me is because I’ve promised them anonymity.
[…] the patents wars seriously. Google not so much” where in turn Mark Stephens writing on his blog “The enemy of my enemy” is quoted as assigning the following break down for the sum paid by each of the members of the […]
Makes sense to me…
It seems you and he are often in agreement.
Yes, you could almost say they are the same person.
Where does Virnetx fit into all this? They seem to have the security patents for 4G/LTE security??? Would GOOG want to make a bid for them??? AAPL??
Thanks and great piece.
[…] Roundup Posted on July 3, 2011 by admin Cringely, has provided an updated look at how the Nortel patent sale was […]
Great scoop, if true. I just hope your sources here aren’t folks from the convenience store down the road.
[…] = true; s.src = 'http://widgets.digg.com/buttons.js'; s1.parentNode.insertBefore(s, s1); })(); Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of […]
Wow. Cringely’s writing about Technology again?! Awesome! Welcome back. I might ‘un-un-subscribe’ to your RSS feed.
Why bother?
What? This is awesome! Cause for celebration!.. For a while there you were down on tech, but it’s great to see you’re back!!
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] = ''; clicksor_text_link_color = ''; clicksor_enable_text_link = true; affiliate marketingRobert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of […]
[…] […]
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] Fuente Tweet […]
[…] Gets Outright Ownership Of Nortel 4G Patents? On July 3, 2011, in News, by Matthew Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] voice, visual as well as semiconductor technologies. Some one some-more sum have emerged from I, Cringely which, if correct (no source is credited), breaks down just who gets what in a obvious stuff […]
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] Via：Reuters，Cringely […]
Apple doesn’t need to buy any patents to kill off Android– Apple already has been granted the key multi-touch patents that make android a dead OS walking.
Android is a direct rip-off of Apple’s multi-touch UI, and after suffering thru Microsoft getting away with stealing the GUI, Apple was not going to suffer the same fate.
The only reason that Apple has not sued Google is that they are simply establishing precedent with the manufacturers. Once those cases are settled, google is DOA.
And this is the way it should be– Google stole Apple’s technology, and, frankly, if justice is served will become an Apple subsidiary as a result.
Be careful what you wish for “Engineer”.
Now that the hardware technology allows it on your phone you want only one company to be able to offer it to consumers?
Competition is the driver in our society. More government regulation is the alternative. How is artificially reducing competition in your best interests? Stop drinking the cool-aid!
bjust: If Apple asserts their patents and forces Google to change their Android UI, I think that is great for competition. It means Google would have to actually innovate and come up with their own UI instead of copying Apple’s.
Not so sure. If you touch my skin with several fingers and I can feel all of them, how is that patentable? The question is whether Google is doing it exactly the same way as Apple or slightly differently. Besides, Google isn’t doing it, the phone makers are and many of their screens are larger and better looking than Apple’s…case closed.
The most successful societies are those built on the rule of law. The law rewards innovators with patents. Application of patent in innovative ways ensures success in markets. Those who steal from hardworking creators of innovations undermine society and should not be allowed to prosper in their chosen ways.
I assume you’re aware that Apple is currently suing a handful of MAJOR Android OEMs? They’re doing it because Google GIVES ANDROID AWAY FOR FREE. You can’t sue someone for damages if they give your stuff away for free. It’s the hardware “partners” that make money off Android, hence Apple is picking them off.
On the flip side, MS is already extrating damages (royalties) from Android OEMs. So much for the great free OS.
I guess my point is what is or is not a patentable innovation is up to the courts since the patent system is obviously broken if you can patent an idea as opposed to one implementation of an idea.
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] Read More [via MacRumors] […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] writes: Here’s the consortium participation as I understand it. RIM and Ericsson together put up $1.1 […]
[…] gang, correction: consortium, going to divy up their newly purchased treasure chest? According to Robert Cringely, who has “sources”, Apple is going to own everything related to LTE, in addition to […]
[…] Источник: I, Cringley […]
[…] Robert Cringley savo straipsnyje „Mano priešo priešas“ praneša naujas detales apie bankrutavusios kanadiečių kompanijos Nortel intelektualinės […]
[…] Источник: I, Cringley […]
[…] voice, visible as good as semiconductor technologies. Some one some-more sum have emerged from I, Cringely which, if scold (no source is credited), breaks down only who gets what in a apparent things […]
[…] Cringely fa sapere che RIM ed Ericsson si sono unite per fornire un contributo di “soli” 1.1 miliardi dollari per avere anch’esse una buona parte dei brevetti acquistati. Infine Microsoft e Sony avrebbero contribuito per 1 miliardo di dollari ed EMC ha versato “solo” 400 milioni per l’acquisizione di pochissimi brevetti. […]
[…] aber auch die Beiträge zum Höchstgebot gleichwertig sein müssen. Dies war laut einem Bericht von Mark Stephens jedoch nicht der […]
If the group of them suddenly drop many lawsuits on Google or Android provides, or OHSA members, then I wonder if RICO would apply?
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] Internet, voice, visual and semiconductor technologies. Some additional sum have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down accurately who gets what in a obvious […]
NorTel’s bankruptcy left a lot of pensioners out in the cold. Is there any chance they will get something out of this unexpected windfall?
[…] I, Cringely » The enemy of my enemy – Bob Cringely on Google’s next likely move after losing the Nortel patent portfolio to an alliance of its enemies […]
[…] it’s possible more solid information becomes available at that time.[Reuters, TechCrunch, Cringely, @asymco @FOSSpatents]Read More… [Source: TiPb – The #1 iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch […]
What’s up with the trolls. Makes for a slower read. Need an ‘ignore’ feature, Bob.
So what exactly did AAPL get? Are these fringe patents or (court decision aside) does Steve rule the entire LTE 4G space?
[…] Via：Reuters，Cringely […]
[…] Via：Reuters，Cringely […]
[…] to internal sources with promised anonymity by “I, Cringely” (emphasis added) “Here’s the consortium participation as I […]
[…] Robert Cringely claims to have some details of the deals that were in place for the $4.5 billion acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio. The patents were ultimately won by a consortium that included Apple. The auction drew interest of many of the major players in mobile today due to Nortel’s large portfolio of Long Term Evolution (LTE, also known as “4G”) related patents. […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony added […]
I’m no Google fanboy, but this is distressing. I miss the old Apple more and more every day; you know, the one that tried to compete by making things that were easy to use, not hard to avoid using.
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] Internet, voice, optical and semiconductor technologies. Some additional details have emerged from I, Cringely which, if accurate (no source is credited), breaks down exactly who gets what in the patent feeding […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony added […]
[…] combined another $340 million to a winning obvious bid. The remaining splits are unknown, though Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put adult $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony added […]
Haters… Jealous that Android is the best mobile platform….
Another reason why the whole concepts of patents is well past its sell by date.
[…] Cringely fa sapere che RIM ed Ericsson si sono unite per fornire un contributo di “soli” 1.1 miliardi dollari per avere anch’esse una buona parte dei brevetti acquistati. Infine Microsoft e Sony avrebbero contribuito per 1 miliardo di dollari ed EMC ha versato “solo” 400 milioni per l’acquisizione di pochissimi brevetti. […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony added […]
Yet another good reason to scrap our ridiculous patent system and the fictitious notion of “intellectual property”
In the end, it’s consumers who lose out. I may not a huge Google fan, but this stifles innovation. Between patents and lawyers, we spend more money on “protecting intellectual property” than innovating. It’s competition which drives innovation, and these companies are afraid of competition – the spirit of Microsoft lives on!
Patent law doesn’t prevent Apple from innovating.
Yes patents don’t stop Apple from innovating but it does stop companies like Google from seeing what is out there and copying it. The biggest patent holder out of the group is Microsoft. They invest the most in research and development. Google needs to take their money and do the same to stay competitive. Android is not innovative. Its written in Java along with changes that were made – (Oracle has yet to be paid). Apple has legitimate patents as result of their research and development and the same goes for Microsoft. Android is not a free it cost those companies a lot of money to come up with multiple technologies Android was built upon. Google should have been upfront with phone manufacturers and told them there maybe cost to this. But instead they said here you go its free, its on us. No protection was needed because it was something they created. Wrong…..Costly wrong.
“The biggest patent holder out of the group is Microsoft. They invest the most in research and development. Google needs to take their money and do the same to stay competitive.”
Competitive in what? Microsoft are bringing up the rear in mobile and play second or maybe third fiddle to Google in search, and only then because Microsoft spend, spend, spend to buy customers and users.
“Android is not innovative. Its written in Java along with changes that were made – (Oracle has yet to be paid).”
For what? That Google supposedly infringe on a bunch of Sun patents that, like virtually all patents, just build on stuff already out there.
“Apple has legitimate patents as result of their research and development and the same goes for Microsoft.”
And? Apple sees the writing on the wall: that broad support for Android is eroding their lead and that they can’t stay ahead technologically for much longer. Microsoft just can’t compete using that supposedly valuable know-how, so they appeal to the courts to give strength to their monopoly instruments instead.
“Android is not a free it cost those companies a lot of money to come up with multiple technologies Android was built upon.”
The value is in the execution, not someone claiming they came up with techniques that they then can’t do anything with themselves. And you’ll find that Google have merely had better bang for their investment than the whining patent aggressors.
You should do some actual research into these matters instead of just parroting the latest line from Redmond.
[…] to Mark Stephens, who writes under the byline Robert X. Cringely, the cost — and the spoils — were split as […]
[…] combined another $340 million to a winning obvious bid. The remaining splits are unknown, though Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put adult $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] combined another $340 million to a winning obvious bid. The remaining splits are unknown, though Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put adult $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] The enemy of my enemy >> I, Cringely “Google would have preferred to win the auction, but with the consortium sitting on more than $100bn in cash, the outcome came down to determination, not resources. Google stayed in it only long enough to make sure of the consortium’s intentions and to make the purchase more painful for them… “It certainly mattered to Google, because that $4.5bn number will be at the heart of the inevitable anti-trust lawsuit Google will file almost immediately. Every good anti-trust lawyer in America just cancelled his or her July 4th holiday to prepare their pitch for Google, which will probably claim Restraint of Trade as well. “..Google can probably operate unfettered for another 2-3 years, during which they’ll try to build their own mobile patent portfolio. Google may well be able to use the courts to slow the actual Nortel transaction, too, according to my lawyer friends. “So the “Android is dead” story here is way premature.” Interesting too on who gets what in the winning consortium. […]
[…] added another $ 340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $ 2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
I’m absolutely amazed at the short-sightedness of the “scrap the patent system” crowd. Why should any company invest millions of dollars in developing technology if any little competitor can buy one once it’s released, reverse-engineer or even blatantly copy it, and release a competitor at a significantly lower price (because it doesn’t have to pay for R&D?).
The Answer: None. The ridiculous statement that competition drives innovation is just plain silly, because while innovation helps you beat your competitor, innovation without being able to protect your innovation is throwing money away.
It’s just like communism: If one group of people gets paid the same as others who work harder or are more skilled, then the ones who work harder or are more skilled finally stop working as hard or developing their skills, because they get paid the same for sitting on the couch as they do for working 14 hour days.
The patent system needs revising, but scrapping it would be disastrous. People need to be able to protect their IP, things that they have put time and blood and sweat and money into creating, so that they can reap the benefits of their hard work. Otherwise, innovation will stop, and we’ll never see The Next Big Thing.
I wonder what those who say the patent/IP system is broken would have said if Google had won the auction? Also, the patent system’s stated aims were to ‘promote’ innovation rather than stifle it. Does ‘copying original designs and concepts’ as a business model constitute innovation?
I think not – it’s quite the opposite.
Disclaimer: patent holding inventor.
Patents are intended to protect the time, effort, and cost of creation and invention. That’s a fair aim. Some things do take time and cost to develop, and it should be protected!
However, with many I.T. inventions, they take considerably less time, and considerably less cost to invent because there is no real infrastructure cost, just ideas. Patenting an ‘idea’ is NOT in the original spirit of the patent system. Patents are intended to protect an idea long enough for the recipient to develop the system and then make a fair profit from it… not to just sit around until somebody elsewhere makes a system similar (without even making reference to your ‘invention’ or having knowledge of it) and then calling in the lawyers.
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another US$340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up US$2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] 12. Враг моего врага […]
[…] como as patentes vão ser divididas? De acordo com o site Robert Cringely, a Apple vai ficar com todos os documentos relacionados à LTE (assim como um conjunto de patentes […]
[…] I, Cringley] If you like Nortel Patents The Android Killer, Share it !!! Tweet (function() { var s […]
Yikes! These big companies..
[…] Without them, Google has small invulnerability contra lawyers seeking to feat obvious law that has nonetheless to sufficient recompense for the fast-changing tech sector. Robert X. Cringely had some-more on a matter. […]
[…] patents cover telecommunications – cell phone technologies. Gringley describes the stakes in The enemy of my enemy. The bidding, which began with a $900 million offer from Google, went far higher than most […]
[…] Without them, Google has little defense versus lawyers seeking to exploit patent law that has yet to adequately compensate for the fast-changing tech sector. Robert X. Cringely had more on the matter. […]
[…] to exploit patent law that has yet to adequately compensate for the fast-changing tech sector. Robert X. Cringely had more on the matter. Article source: […]
[…] Without them, Google has little defense versus lawyers seeking to exploit patent law that has yet to adequately compensate for the fast-changing tech sector. Robert X. Cringely had more on the matter. […]
[…] gang, correction: consortium, going to divy up their newly purchased treasure chest? According to Robert Cringely, who has “sources”, Apple is going to own everything related to LTE, in addition to […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
[…] added another $340 million to the winning patent bid. The remaining splits are unknown, but Robert X Cringely reported that Apple put up $2 billion for Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G patents, with Microsoft and Sony […]
Jealous that Android is the best mobile platform….
[…] first dibs at the Nortel 4G and LTE assets. But, looking behind the scenes we wondered if the Cringely on Technology post is entirely accurate, and whether the private arrangements between the bidders needed a second […]
Good NPR piece “When Patents Attack”,
https://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/26/138576167/when-patents-attack
[…] consortium had a lot of money ($100 billion in cash) to throw at the auction. But Bob Cringely (Cringely on Technology) feels that the consortium felt this was a must-win situation, at any […]
feels that the consortium felt this was a must-win situation
[…] В настоящее время Google защищается в 45 судебных процессах по обвинению в нарушении патентов только в области мобильных технологий, и ее столь высокие ставки в аукционе демонстрируют, что в компании четко понимают необходимость получения прав на использование этих патентов. В свою очередь Apple, заплдатив за полные права на патенты Nortel, касающиеся LTE, приобрела не только возможность получения отчислений от сторонних производителей, но и фактически становится на пути Google к этой 4G-технологии, одновременно укрепляя свои позиции в юридической битве с Android, которая, можно предположить, исками против HTC и Samsung лишь начинается. «Патенты Nortel — попытка убить Android», — пишет Кринджли. Источник: I, Cringley […]
Victoria Texas Lawyers Directory…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The enemy of my enemy – Cringely on technology[…]…
apple iphone 4g…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The enemy of my enemy – Cringely on technology[…]…
You could definitely see your enthusiasm in the work you write. The world hopes for even more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. All the time go after your heart.
Inland Empire Attorney…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The enemy of my enemy – Cringely on technology[…]…
Sunset Beach N.C. Event Photographer…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The enemy of my enemy – Cringely on technology[…]…
[…] o artigo em: https://www.cringely.com/2011/07/the-enemy-of-my-enemy/ Informática […]
[…] Nortel patents. Though the winning bid came from Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, RIM, and Sony, Robert Cringely reported that “Apple put up $2 billion for outright ownership of Nortel’s Long Term Evolution […]