decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
A Wild Theory? | 627 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Apple offers to pay Google [Motorola] $1 per device
Authored by: cricketjeff on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 05:17 PM EDT
Apple have already told the courts what they think a "simple"
essential patent is worth. For a design patent I think I remember they quoted
$30 per device, I suspect Motorla will remind the court of this.

---
There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple's Ultimatum
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 08:22 PM EDT
Apple has to be careful. Here are some of my thoughts.

1. Giving courts an ultimatum is not a good thing to do in my
opinion. I think now we'll definitely see a court ordered rate of
more than $1 per device.

2. Apple has shown that mobile patents are worth billions. How
much more so for the essential piece that makes mobile work?

3. It's arguments that it makes will be used against it. That's
how lawyering works.

4. Judge Posner's ruling says injunction might be necessary if
a licensee refuses to license the SEPs at a reasonable rate. A
court determined reasonable rate would fit that bill. If Apple
refuses to take the license determined in court especially after
bringing it to the court in my opinion would lead this court to
ban all if Apple's devices that implement those standard's. See
my 1 above.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A Wild Theory?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 03:25 AM EDT
I think this offer demonstrates Apple's thinking. They don't
want to pay a percentage as they feel it is taxing their
'inventiveness'. Apple charge premium prices for similar
spec products (iPad mini is 70% more than an N7 in the UK)
and they see 2.25% as equivalent to 4% for others.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • A Wild Theory? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 10:11 AM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )