Apple's patent licensing deal with Nokia may have some additional consequences beyond the immediate effects of the settlement. By agreeing to a long-term licensing agreement with Nokia, Apple gets a lengthly, defensive legal fight out of the way. This allows Apple to focus all its legal energies on major battles with Samsung, HTC and Motorola.
Speaking with the NYTimes, Apple indicates that the settlement is actually a cross-licensing one:
Apple and Nokia have agreed to drop all of our current lawsuits and enter into a license covering some of each other’s patents, but not the majority of the innovation that makes the iPhone unique. We are glad to put this behind us and get back to focusing on our respective businesses.
There a larger, much more strategic victory here as well. By agreeing to pay royalties for Nokia's patents, Apple has set a market price -- and given Nokia's patents serious legitimacy. Apple wouldn't pay anything if they didn't have to, and other companies may not want to fight over turf Apple has already acquiesced to Nokia.
/article-new/2011/06/jobs.jpg?lossy)
Other companies, notably Android handset manufacturers, may now have to play ball with Nokia on these patents -- and they don't necessarily have the margins to send 1% of gross revenues to Nokia as easily as Apple can. In fact, because Apple has so many of its own patents (some of which it cross-licensed to Nokia) other manufacturers may have to pay even more for the same licenses.
Florian Mueller has suggested just that at FOSS Patents:
Given that Android is in many ways a rip-off of Apple's operating software, Android-based devices are highly likely to infringe on largely the same Nokia patents that Apple now felt forced to pay for.
[...]
This is a sweet defeat for Apple because its competitors -- especially those building Android-based devices -- will also have to pay Nokia, and most if not all of them will likely have to pay more on a per-unit basis because they don't bring as much intellectual property to the table as Apple definitely did.
Apple pays off Nokia, but exposes the competition as well. Competition that doesn't have as much money or intellectual property to barter with.
(Photo by Acaben/Flickr)
Top Rated Comments
It's best for our interests as consumers if companies have strong reasons to do the R&D for new developments, with rights to their patents being one of their incentives. But it's also in our interests to see new developments used in many products, which can result from cross-licensing and even from patent infringement! Somebody (us) ultimately has to pay for it, of course, but I'd rather pay for R&D than for court battles.
The guy has actually given some good coverage on the Lodsys issues lately.
Don't see the point of such ad hominem attacks. If you have beef with the actual article then say it.
To me it appears the two platforms are similar, so he has a point.
For example one of the patents is on "Mobile Station with Touch Input Having Automatic Symbol Magnification Function,"
Which is how the iPhone zooms in on the key when you press it on the virtual keyboard. That's a software patent.
See the actual filing here: http://tinyurl.com/yd4rcop (you have to register with the ITC, but it's free)
Real mature.
Great assumptions.
That's true but I don't see any reason why he would be bothered.
May be the whole news is wrong and baseless, but it's a good rumour anyway. ;)
I can quote a number of people who said 'paying up' was better than kind of litigation whatsoever.
If I remember right, Marco Arment suggested all developers pay and be happy. Maybe that was a short term solution but was indeed the right thing to do if Apple didn't play the game. Even JohnGruber suggested that Litigation can be a big pain and one can suffer a lot.
I don't see anything wrong with his suggession. Like many others, no one knew that Apple was gonna step in, the way things turned out.
Provide links so even I can understand that?
Maybe he is, but I think he is too short tempered and abusive some times.
I guess you'd be all for an Apple dictatorship over the market wouldn't you. Are you sure you're a consultant? :rolleyes: