backtop


Print 10 comment(s) - last by atechfan.. on Feb 10 at 5:02 PM


  (Source: gsmarena.com)
Nokia and HTC will also work on projects together in regards to HTC's LTE patents

Nokia and HTC have decided to play nice and settle all ongoing patent disputes between the two. 

According to Nokia, HTC will pay the Finnish company a fee for access to its technology, but the fee amount is being kept quiet. 

In addition, Nokia and HTC will work on projects together in regards to HTC's LTE patents, and will even pair up for other future technology projects. 

"We are very pleased to have reached a settlement and collaboration agreement with HTC, which is a long standing licensee for Nokia's standards essential patents," said Paul Melin, chief intellectual property officer at Nokia. "This agreement validates Nokia's implementation patents and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities." 

Nokia and HTC are just one recent example of tech companies working together rather than arguing. For instance, Samsung settled with Google, Ericsson and Cisco separately in recent weeks to end litigation related to patents. 

However, one notable patent rivalry still remains, and that's between Samsung and Apple. The two have been duking it out since April 2011 when Apple accused Samsung of being an iPhone and iPad copycat. 

But there's hope for an end to the bloody battle (at least in the U.S.), as both Apple and Samsung agreed to mediation over U.S. patents last month. Samsung CEO Oh-Hyun Kwon and Apple CEO Tim Cook agreed to meet regarding settlement opportunities on or before February 19.

Source: Nokia



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

.
By StevoLincolnite on 2/8/2014 6:50:51 PM , Rating: 5
Poor HTC, Now they have to pay fee's to Nokia too, that's in conjunction to having to Pay Microsoft and Apple.
Not sure if they have to pay licensing fee's to Samsung or Sony though.

Then they have had product bans on top of it all, it honestly feels like everyone is trying to squeeze the struggling "little guy" completely out of the market, removing the extra competition.




RE: .
By Reclaimer77 on 2/8/2014 8:06:39 PM , Rating: 2
Such bullshit. Innovation destroyed by lawyers, end of story.

Paying "licensing" fess because they used a SOC the didn't even design or manufacture. Why isn't Qualcomm the target? Rhetorical question.

MicroTrollia and Apple are a scourge that should be wiped from the market.


RE: .
By atechfan on 2/9/2014 5:19:26 AM , Rating: 2
So any company that sues over patents should be wiped from the market?


RE: .
By Alexvrb on 2/9/2014 3:08:09 PM , Rating: 5
Except his precious.


RE: .
By atechfan on 2/9/2014 7:39:19 PM , Rating: 2
Funny you should mention that, as Google has sued British Telecom and Apple, both over patent infringement. Even more funny is the fact that Google is suing the US government because they did not get a contract that the government said another bidder better fulfilled the requirement for.


RE: .
By Reclaimer77 on 2/10/2014 11:22:51 AM , Rating: 2
This isn't simply suing for patents. It's clear collusion in an attempt to wipe a competitor from the market. Big difference.


RE: .
By atechfan on 2/10/2014 5:02:40 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong on every count. If they were trying to wipe HTC from the market, then they would not license, but would follow the Apple route and go for a ban.

Besides, HTC is not a competitor the Nokia. Nokia no longer makes handsets. They are also not a competitor to MS, as HTC also makes Windows Phones.

Neither of your bogeymen have anything to gain by HTC going out of business.


RE: .
By Belegost on 2/9/2014 5:08:05 PM , Rating: 3
More like the "little guy" having to pay the ante to get dealt in. HTC came to the mobile business as an ODM (a manufacturer like Hon Hai that produces devices for other companies) as they gained more experience in the field they struck out to be a brand of their own.

That's great, except that HTC came into a mature market with major players who had invested a huge amount of money into research to develop the market. Nokia, QC, Ericsson, Motorola, etc. all spent piles of money through the 80s and 90s putting together the fundamentals of the modern cellular system. On the other side of this you have companies like MS, Apple, IBM, etc. building the modern computing OS, UI, and APIs.

HTC did little to none of this work. They then entered the market and started producing devices that worked using the same designs these other companies put the effort into developing. It's hardly surprising those companies go after them to recover their investment. Without a significant relevant portfolio of their own to cross-license HTC has little choice but to pay up.

Also I know Reclaimer labeled his question rhetorical, I assume because he knows the answer, but others may not know the answer, so I'll explain.

When Qualcomm sells their chips the contracts are written so that the purchasing company is responsible for licensing any relevant patents and Qualcomm will not provide licenses for patents except those belonging to Qualcomm. There are several reasons for this, one is that some customers already have cross-licensing agreements in place, so Qualcomm would be charging for a license fee that manufacturer doesn't need, or would need to have intimate knowledge of their customers licensing (something that tends to be kept quiet) to know which licenses they need to pay and which they don't. Another is the issue of dead stock liability, Qualcomm does not want to be a position where they are liable for license fees if orders are cancelled and chips don't get to customers. This is fairly common in B2B sales contracts like this.


RE: .
By Bagom on 2/9/2014 11:37:03 PM , Rating: 2
I get companies spent time and money to patent tech stuff. Why can't tech patent follow how drug patent work. I think they have 7 years then other companies are free to bring generic drugs to market. Have a tech company get paid a fee for a certain time frame (5 years or so) and then it is open to other companies. Just a thought.


RE: .
By ipay on 2/10/2014 3:25:58 AM , Rating: 2
Because, generally speaking, "normal" patents don't have the potential of saving lives and benefiting humanity.


"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki