Summary: 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.
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.
“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.”
"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.”
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.
Comments
Michael
2012-11-15 02:27:37
NotZed
2012-11-15 04:15:07
"no material impact" doesn't (necessarily) mean zero, and even a zero-money-changed-hands cross-licensing deal isn't a zero opportunity cost.