Frand-patent disputes
Steve Jobs last year claimed Apple wanted to destroy Android for infringing its patents and called for more clarity over how patents should be handled. The company complained that the rules protecting intellectual property are neither transparent nor consistent. Both Samsung and Motorola sued Apple over Frand principles, which were put in place to ensure that technologies crucial to the industry are distributed under fair and non-discriminatory terms. Apple committed itself to these rules in 2007. Last year it also sued its rivals for alleged infringements on its non-Frand patents.
In the letter sent to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute Apple requested ‘appropriate royalty rate’ and ‘common royalty base’ as well as no injunction policy under which patent holders cannot block sale of rivals’ products on the basis of Frand-patent dispute. The letter followed Frand-type patent dispute with Samsung as well as Motorola. Samsung attempted to sue Apple last year, but a Dutch court refused the claim as being too expensive. The European Commission is still investigating whether Samsung failed to license key technologies to its rivals and used its rights to ‘distort competition in European mobile device markets’.
Also see: Samsung and the patent abuse
Disputes with Motorola
Last week’s dispute with Motorola forced Apple to temporarily remove several of its devices, mainly iPads and IPhones, from its German online store. Its main focus was on GPRS data transmission standard used by GSM cellular networks- an innovation considered crucial to the industry. The ban was therefore suspended after Apple made a new licence payment offer. Another court dispute with Motorola centred around Apple’s iCloud and MobileMe. Motorola claimed that Apple infringed its patent on two-way communications between pagers and other devices. Apple however appealed against the decision considering the patent to be invalid.
Its latest lawsuit against Motorola focused on ‘slide-to-unlock’ feature on smartphones. The patent was granted to Apple in March 2010 and the company won the dispute. This marks company’s first patent victory over Motorola and is considered a very important win in the battle between Apple and Android. The defeated firm however believes the decision will have no impact on supply or future sales and plans to appeal against the judgement.
Motorola Mobility is currently in the process of being acquired by Google. Most of its handsets run on Android - Google's mobile operating system, which is Apple's closest rival in the mobile market. Although the judgement relates only to activity in the German market, the decision could potentially help Apple with other patent disputes. Microsoft and Cisco back Apple in the matter. Microsoft has also forced some Android handset makers to pay it for the use of some of its patents following the letter Apple wrote.
Most manufacturers are in favour of Frand-type agreements, particularly when they are on the receiving end of a lawsuit, however the principle cannot compromise rights of patent holders. On the other hand there is a worry that patent wars may hinder innovation. They are especially discouraging for small businesses that can not afford to get involved in lengthy legal battles. If large technology companies keep focusing all their resources on legal proceedings and smaller players are discouraged from launching new products, further development may be much slower in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment