Top
Approvals 10/3 ▼
Relientk77 (3) - 1335d ago Cancel
Anon1974 (2) - 1335d ago Cancel
freemmogamer (2) - 1335d ago Cancel
peanut72 (1) - 1335d ago Cancel
Knight_Crawler (1) - 1335d ago Cancel
GamersTwitch (1) - 1335d ago Cancel
80°

Motorola v. Microsoft: US District Court Says FRAND Patents Can't Be Used For Injunction

theverge.com: Motorola wanted to ban the Xbox 360, among other things. The International Trade Commission agreed that Microsoft's products infringed. Microsoft claimed that Motorola wanted too much money to license the so-called standards-essential patents, and attempted to fight the ban. Now, two weeks after a trial kicked off in Seattle, common sense appears to have prevailed. US District Court Judge Robart has agreed to dismiss Motorola's attempts for injunctive relief based on its fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) patents, effectively saying that Motorola will have to pursue money (in the form of royalties) rather than attempt to ban products.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (2)- Updates (2)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community1335d ago
Changed: title
GreenRanger1335d ago
The story is too old to be commented.
Anon19741335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

Anyone else notice that Microsoft's Entertainment division didn't start posting regular quarterly profits until after they up and stopped paying Motorola for the tech used in the Xbox sometime in late 2009, which prompted the lawsuits? That's quite the coincidence, especially when you consider the amount of money that Motorola says they're owed.

And it's not like the patents themselves are in dispute. Microsoft was paying them for years before deciding that it was suddenly too much and so they just wouldn't pay at all any more. It's kinda like if I protested a rent increase by continuing to live in the apartment in question but just stopped paying rent altogether. I'm sure that would make my monthly finances look a whole lot better too. Until I had to pay it back. Microsoft already lost in court, they have to pay, but how much? The numbers Motorola is talking would easily wipe out any profit the Entertainment division made since the 360's release.

cl19831335d ago

The reason that Microsoft refused to keep paying is that Motorola started to charge unreasonable and discriminatory royalties for its technology.

http://online.wsj.com/artic...

Hicken1335d ago

Your cited article also says that Microsoft- according to Motorola- stopped paying first after they rejected a "reasonable" offer.

Even IF Motorola tried to charge them too much, that doesn't mean Microsoft can just say, "Nope, don't wanna," and keep using using the patents.

Sure, they have the right to sue, but in the meantime, they have no legal right to use said patents.

nukeitall1335d ago

"Your cited article also says that Microsoft- according to Motorola- stopped paying first after they rejected a "reasonable" offer."

Rejected a reasonable offer from Motorola's view, not MS. Of course Motorola will say their cut throat offer is reasonable, while everyone else thinks it is ridiculous.

"Even IF Motorola tried to charge them too much, that doesn't mean Microsoft can just say, "Nope, don't wanna," and keep using using the patents."

These are standard essential patents, that Motorola pledged fair licensing. It means those patents were accepted into the standard because it was suppose to be fair licensing meaning, MS can't really live without those patents.

"Sure, they have the right to sue, but in the meantime, they have no legal right to use said patents."

As I said, standard essential patents and FRAND, which on the flip side means Motorola can't charge outrageous licensing fees.

cl19831335d ago

Hears part of the fee break downs from Motorola and other patent holders.
http://arstechnica.com/tech...

Knight_Crawler1335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

Do you even do any research before you start posting BS?

MS was paying but Moto decided to up the price and MS thought the price was too high so they stopped paying.

MS wants to pay Moto but not what Moto is asking.

BattleAxe1335d ago

If MS doesn't abide by what Motorola (Patent Holder) is asking for, then they should stop using that particular technology. If MS can simply do what they want, then whats the point of having a patent? I would say that Microsoft is not acting all that different from Chinese companies who completely disregard patents.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

"If MS doesn't abide by what Motorola (Patent Holder) is asking for, then they should stop using that particular technology."

You got disagrees..

On the bright side windows 8 is selling 58% sell than window 7 at launch!
http://semiaccurate.com/201...

aviator1891335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

I think Motorola's asking price of an annual $4 billion pay-out each year is a bit too high for a FRAND patent license. I just wish the two companies had settled all of this out of court.

cee7731335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

$4 billion of what exactly you can never say it was too much maybe it was based off how much income the devices generate as xbox generates billions in revenue in console sales. xbox is one of the top selling console am I right.

microsoft will eventually have to pay back motorola in the end they will owe billions once a judgement is decided especially back pay.

these guys literally charged $100 for A wifi dongle for earlier 360's I say its just karma catching up with microsoft

aviator1891335d ago

I'm not saying they shouldn't pay, but I think the main issue is that motorola are charging microsoft a much higher rate than what they charge other companies for the same license.

rainslacker1335d ago

I don't think this was exclusive to the Xbox. I believe it involved several of MS hardware and possibly software ventures. If it was just Xbox then that would mean that Motorola wanted $57 of each xbox sold to date, based on 4 billion / 70 million consoles. Given this was a yearly payout that price would go up, and if that were the case, I can't see anyone siding with Motorola on that.

What aviator says is right. Motorola came out and charged an outrageous price when their "reasonable" offer was rejected by MS. Tech prices should go down, not up.

Axonometri1335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

Motorola and Microsoft are infringing on my license to breath the air within my personal bubble space. I have filed a lawsuit in my filing cabinet and now order them to pay me the sum of 6 billion hot dogs per quarter until I cease aspirating.

Until such time that I cease aspirating Microsoft will also be required to start making games for their video game consoles and stop playing patty cake with the girl next door.

KMCROC541335d ago

US District Court Judge Robart is my new idol for having the balls to tell Motorola/Google to back the F up with this BS. finally a much more open minded judge compared to Judge Lucy Koh. who seem to be siding with Apple on to many accounts.

chiwoo1335d ago

So in the end MS won the battle but Motorola won the war?