EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

11.14.12

Speculations That HTC Pays Apple Not Verified, Said to be Bogus, and May Only be Anti-Android FUD

Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 8:28 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Trolled!

Steve BallmerSummary: HTC says there is no financial impact to the settlement, but Microsoft boosters say that HTC pays Apple for Android; Techrights investigates what people are saying and where the claims come from

As noted in the previous post, lawyers say that HTC pays Apple per phone sold following the secret settlement and they claim to know the cost. This speculation about Apple getting a patent tax (echoed by John Koetsier in this case) has Groklaw say: “Does that sound fair to you? Sound like the US patent system is working as it should?

“Folks who argue that the US patent system works beautifully for the US economy need to think about the future, then. How beautifully will the system work when other countries make it impossible for US companies to bring new products to market in the US? Think that could never happen? Look at the Apple-Microsoft-Nokia attack on Android. Now put non-US companies in attack mode and against a US product.”

Other sources seem to suggest Apple has retreated. TechDirt writes “HTC And Apple Settle Patent Dispute; Perhaps Tim Cook Realizes Patent Fights Are A Waste” and formal reports say nothing about a tax. Why? Because they do fact-checking. One Android site says:

While the specific details of the agreement are under wraps, press is being told by Jeff Grdon, representative for HTC, that HTC “does not expect this license agreement to have any adverse material impact on the financials of the company” – read as: HTC won’t break the bank in the settlement.

Right.

So no losses, correct?

Here is more speculation:

What is Google’s real incentive in seeding the Android mobile OS in the global market? Is it to make money from the sale of Android-based handsets and tablets? Certainly, that’s part of Google’s strategy. After all, through its Motorola Mobility acquisition, Google is a player in the smartphone and tablet markets.

Recently, there have been several reports about how Apple’s recent settlement with Taiwan’s HTC could mean that Apple and Microsoft make more from Android going forward than Google does. Apple and HTC have a cross-licensing deal that some are saying could mean Apple collects $6 to $8 per Android phone sold. The truth is, though, that Google’s real benefit from the spread of Android comes from bringing new users into its lucrative search/ad ecosystem.

Where do these numbers come from? These have not been verified. Given that Apple feels blowback (calls to boycott Apple and generally a great disdain or forced apologies that embarrass the company’s culture), we might as well suspect a non-victory for Apple. One expert says:

“This settlement and their statement on Friday don’t quite jive,” says David Martin, Founder and Chief Executive of M·CAM. “Apple is starting to look at the market consequence of their litigation strategy and realizing there may be some blow back from it.”

The Microsoft booster says that Apple gets paid (among other outrageous things), but maybe this is just propaganda. Groklaw writes in response: “Inventor of the touch screen, my foot. And by the way, isn’t Apple the company claiming that if it has to pay a more or less equivalent sum for FRAND patents owned by Android vendors, it will put them out of business? And next comes Nokia, the rumors continue, trying to get HTC to pay them too, and they already pay to Microsoft. They call this royalty stacking [Mark Lemley's paper explaining it, PDF], and it’s a fast way to kill off the competition, if you gang up on them this way. Meanwhile, both Apple and Microsoft are whining to regulators about royalty burdens they are threatened with if they can’t devalue FRAND patents. If there are 250,000 patents that read on just one smartphone, where in the world is the profit going to come from? You can’t make a phone in that environment. Instead of getting rid of software patents and/or devaluing all patents or even coming up with a reduced rate for victims of royalty stacking demands, Apple and Microsoft would like the devalue the ones they don’t own, but Android vendors own, while leaving their patents at full value. That way Android can’t compete in the marketplace and people will stop selling it. If by any chance you are thinking that *Apple* would never pull such a dirty trick, I direct you to their response to the UK court’s order to post a notice that Samsung didn’t copy Apple’s design patent, which the court characterized as showing a “lack of integrity”. Where are the antitrust regulators now?”

“It’s all secretive, but Microsoft and Apple try to deceive the press and the regulators.”But wait, does this booster (Eric Savitz) just spread his usual FUD? These are not verified claims, it could be just a scare tactic. Here is a more accurate report.

“Microsoft and Google’s Motorola Mobility unit are set to square off on Tuesday at a trial with strategic implications for the smartphone patent wars and which could reveal financial information the two companies usually keep under wraps,” says the Indian press. It’s all secretive, but Microsoft and Apple try to deceive the press and the regulators.

We do not even know how much HTC pays Microsoft, if anything, The claims of five dollars are unverified. Here is a new example of spin in patent settlements:

In Planning Software Patent Settlement, Both Sides Claim Victory

In the wake of a settlement of a patent infringement lawsuit involving two major financial planning software products, both sides are proclaiming victory.

“We are extraordinarily happy,” said David Loeper, CEO of Wealthcare Capital Management, the plaintiff in the case. “We’re not just happy; we had a great celebration when the agreement was settled. I can understand why the other side would be too, given the liability if we had proceeded with litigation.”

This is what the Apple-HTC settlement might have been like. It is possible that HTC pays nobody for Android. It’s speculation. When Microsoft signed a patent deal with Novell, for example, Novell was actually bribed, not charged. It was all for FUD. They create fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

Update: hours after I had drafted this post I found this post titled: “Here is why HTC doesn’t pay a cent to Apple”

Remember those statements from yesterday that HTC has to pay Apple around $6-$8 for each and every Android smartphone they sell? Well it turns out that this was complete bogus.

As I suspected when I first researched this topic, this is all just FUD and the claim is most likely bunk. Sites like Groklaw got suckered by the FUD, which had simply spread all around the Web, sometimes by all the usual suspects.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

2 Comments

  1. Michael said,

    November 14, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    Gravatar

    This speculation about Apple getting a patent tax (echoed by John Koetsier in this case) has Grok law say: “Does that sound fair to you? Sound like the US patent system is working as it should?

    If HTC has been illegally using Apple’s property it makes a lot of sense for HTC to pay Apple for past and future use. Of course.

    formal reports say nothing about a tax

    Of course not. You are using the term "tax" completely incorrectly. Why would others use your incorrect term?

    Right.
    So no losses, correct?

    We do not know that. It could be he is comparing what *is* with would would be likely if this went to court. We do not know. Note, the fact we do not know means we do not know that HTC is paying Apple anything – I am not suggesting they are!

    Apple and HTC have a cross-licensing deal that some are saying could mean Apple collects $6 to $8 per Android phone sold. The truth is, though, that Google’s real benefit from the spread of Android comes from bringing new users into its lucrative search/ad ecosystem.

    Right. Google’s main business model is to collect data on users and monetize it. Scary, eh? Yet you try to prop them up as the good guys. Neither Apple nor Google nor Samsung nor Microsoft are blameless entities… they all have mixes of good and evil. Your bias, though, makes you focus on the evils of MS and Apple and pretend Samsung and Google are the good guys. Completely absurd and unsupportable. This is shown by your claiming Eric Savitz is a "Microsoft booster". More immature silliness from you. Your claim is shown to be false just looking at his articles on MS: http://seekingalpha.com/author/eric-savitz/articles/symbol/msft Notice how some are good and some are bad. No *objective* sign of "boosting". You see anyone who does not buy into your paranoid BS as boosting those you see as being evil.
     

  2. NotZed said,

    November 14, 2012 at 11:15 pm

    Gravatar

    It’s still all just speculation – just how litigators like it when they settle. Maybe the ability to keep settlements secret should be looked at since in general it doesn’t seem to serve much public interest.

    “no material impact” doesn’t (necessarily) mean zero, and even a zero-money-changed-hands cross-licensing deal isn’t a zero opportunity cost.

What Else is New


  1. Links 21/6/2018: Microsoft's 'Damage Control' Amid Role in ICE Scandals, 11-Hour Azure Downtime (Again), GNOME 3.29.3, and More GNU/Linux Wins

    Links for the day



  2. Battistelli and Topić Lose Their Bogus 'Case' Against Judge Corcoran After They Defamed Him and Ruined His Career/Life

    The SLAPP action against Judge Patrick Corcoran, who has so far won all cases involving the EPO, is finally dismissed in Germany; what remains is an ugly legacy at the EPO, wherein everyone bold enough to say something about corruption at the top is having his or her life — not just career — destroyed



  3. Even Media of the Patent Microcosm Mentions the Decline in Quality of Patents at the EPO, Based on Its Very Own Stakeholders, While IAM Ignores the News

    The whole world basically accepts, based on patent examiners as well as those whom they interact with (patent agents), that patent quality at the EPO has sunk; but the EPO and IAM continue to vigorously deny that as it threatens some people's nefarious agenda



  4. Links 20/6/2018: Qt 5.11.1, Oracle Solaris 11.3 SRU 33, HHVM 3.27.0, Microsoft Helping ICE

    Links for the day



  5. Patent Extremists Are Unable to Find Federal Circuit Cases That Help Them Mislead on Alice

    Patent extremists prefer talking about Mayo but not Alice when it comes to 35 U.S.C. § 101; Broadcom is meanwhile going on a 'fishing expedition', looking to profit from patents by calling for embargo through the ITC



  6. What Use Are 10 Million Patents That Are of Low Quality in a Patent Office Controlled by the Patent 'Industry'?

    The patent maximalists are celebrating overgranting; the USPTO, failing to heed the warning from patent courts, continues issuing far too many patents and a new paper from Mark Lemley and Robin Feldman offers a dose of sobering reality



  7. The Eastern District of Texas is Where Asian Companies/Patents/Trolls Still Go After TC Heartland

    Proxies of Longhorn IP and KAIST (Katana Silicon Technologies LLC and KAIST IP US LLC, respectively) roam Texas in pursuit of money of out nothing but patents and aggressive litigation; there's also a Microsoft connection



  8. EPO Insiders Correct the Record of Benoît Battistelli’s Tyranny and Abuse of Law: “Legal Harassment and Retaliation”

    Battistelli’s record, as per EPO-FLIER 37, is a lot worse than the Office cares to tell stakeholders, who are already complaining about decline in patent quality



  9. Articles About a Unitary Patent System Are Lies and Marketing From Law Firms With 'Lawsuits Lust'

    Team UPC has grown louder with its lobbying efforts this past week; the same lies are being repeated without much of a challenge and press ownership plays a role in that



  10. The Decline in Patent Quality at the EPO Causes Frivolous Lawsuits That Only Lawyers Profit From

    The European Patent Office (EPO) will continue granting low-quality European Patents under the leadership of the Battistelli-'nominated' Frenchman, António Campinos; this is bad news for science and technology as that quite likely means a lot more lawsuits without merit (which only lawyers profit from)



  11. What Battistelli's Workers Think of His Latest EPO Propaganda

    "Modernising the EPO" is what Battistelli calls a plethora of human rights abuses and corruption



  12. Links 19/6/2018: Total War: WARHAMMER II Confirmed for GNU/Linux, DragonFlyBSD 5.2.2 Released

    Links for the day



  13. More Media Reports About Decline in Quality of European Patents (Granted by the EPO)

    What the media is saying about the letter from Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner whilst EPO communications shift attention to shallow puff pieces about how wonderful Benoît Battistelli is



  14. Beware Team UPC's Biggest Two Lies About the Unitary Patent (UPC)

    Claims that a Unified Patent Court (UPC) will commence next year are nothing but a fantasy of the Liar in Chief, Benoît Battistelli, who keeps telling lies to French media (some of which he passes EPO money to, just like he passes EPO money to his other employer)



  15. Diversity at the EPO

    Two decades of EPO with 16-17 years under the control of French Presidents (and nowadays predominantly French management in general with Inventor Award held in France almost half the time) is "diversity at the EPO"



  16. Orrin Hatch, Sponsored the Most by the Pharmaceutical Industry, Tries to Make Its Patents Immune From Scrutiny (PTAB)

    Orrin Hatch is the latest example of laws being up for sale, i.e. companies can 'buy' politicians to act as their 'couriers' and pass laws for them, including laws pertaining to patents



  17. Links 17/6/2018: Linux 4.18 RC1 and Deepin 15.6 Released

    Links for the day



  18. To Keep the Patent System Alive and Going Practitioners Will Have to Accept Compromises on Scope Being Narrowed

    35 U.S.C. § 101 still squashes a lot of software patents, reducing confidence in US patents; the only way to correct this is to reduce patent filings and file fewer lawsuits, judging their merit in advance based on precedents from higher courts



  19. The Affairs of the USPTO Have Turned Into Somewhat of a Battle Against the Courts, Which Are Simply Applying the Law to Invalidate US Patents

    The struggle between law, public interest, and the Cult of Patents (which only ever celebrates more patents and lawsuits) as observed in the midst of recent events in the United States



  20. Patent Marketing Disguised as Patent 'Advice'

    The meta-industry which profits from patents and lawsuits claims that it's guiding us and pursuing innovation, but in reality its sole goal is enriching itself, even if that means holding science back



  21. Microsoft is Still 'Cybermobbing' Its Competition Using Patent Trolls Such as Finjan

    In the "cybersecurity" space, a sub-domain where many software patents have been granted by the US patent office, the patent extortion by Microsoft-connected trolls (and Microsoft's 'protection' racket) seems to carry on; but Microsoft continues to insist that it has changed its ways



  22. Links 16/6/2018: LiMux Story, Okta Openwashing and More

    Links for the day



  23. The EPO's Response to the Open Letter About Decline in Patent Quality as the Latest Example of Arrogance and Resistance to Facts, Truth

    Sidestepping the existential crisis of the EPO (running out of work and issuing many questionable patents with expectation of impending layoffs), the PR people at the Office choose a facts-denying, face-saving 'damage control' strategy while staff speaks out, wholeheartedly agreeing with concerned stakeholders



  24. In the United States the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Which Assures Patent Quality, is Still Being Smeared by Law Firms That Profit From Patent Maximalism, Lawsuits

    Auditory roles which help ascertain high quality of patents (or invalidate low-quality patents, at least those pointed out by petitions) are being smeared, demonised as "death squads" and worked around using dirty tricks that are widely described as "scams"



  25. The 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI) Hype, Propped Up by Events of the European Patent Office (EPO), is Infectious and It Threatens Patent Quality Worldwide

    Having spread surrogate terms like “4IR” (somewhat of a 'mask' for software patents, by the EPO's own admission in the Gazette), the EPO continues with several more terms like “ICT” and now we’re grappling with terms like “AI”, which the media endlessly perpetuates these days (in relation to patents it de facto means little more than "clever algorithms")



  26. Links 15/6/2018: HP Chromebook X2 With GNU/Linux Software, Apple Admits and Closes a Back Door ('Loophole')

    Links for the day



  27. The '4iP Council' is a Megaphone of Team UPC and Team Battistelli at the EPO

    The EPO keeps demonstrating lack of interest in genuine patent quality (it uses buzzwords to compensate for deviation from the EPC and replaces humans with shoddy translators); it is being aided by law firms which work for patent trolls and think tanks that propel their interests



  28. Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner Find the Courage to Express Concerns About Battistelli's Ugly Legacy and Low Patent Quality

    The astounding levels of abuse at the EPO have caused some of the EPO's biggest stakeholders to speak out and lash out, condemning the Office for mismanagement amongst other things



  29. IAM Concludes Its Latest Anti-§ 101 Think Tank, Featuring Crooked Benoît Battistelli

    The attack on 35 U.S.C. § 101, which invalidates most if not all software patents, as seen through the lens of a Battistelli- and Iancu-led lobbying event (set up by IAM)



  30. Google Gets Told Off -- Even by the Typically Supportive EFF and TechDirt -- Over Patenting of Software

    The EFF's Daniel Nazer, as well as TechDirt's founder Mike Masnick, won't tolerate Google's misuse of Jarek Duda's work; the USPTO should generally reject all applications for software patents -- something which a former Commissioner for Patents at the USPTO seems to be accepting now (that such patents have no potency after Alice)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts