Google is reportedly facing antitrust allegations over restricted access to smartphone patents the company owns.
FTC May Recommend Antitrust Suit Against Google : Read more
FTC May Recommend Antitrust Suit Against Google : Read more
- Status
So Google faces antitrust allegations because it "blocks the import of products made by Apple and Microsoft."
Google commands 75% of the market on a product it gives away for free and until recently was on Apple's own hardware. Google only filed suit againt Apple because apparently that's the only way they'll talk to any other company.
Apple on the other hand constantly tries to block products and filed a 2 billion suit against Samsung. On top of that they remove any competition from the Istore. Why aren't they doing anything about that?
PS I would make fun of MS but they don't try to block products like Apple, they're market share is tiny, and they're open to everyone (they're not as draconian as Apple).
Google commands 75% of the market on a product it gives away for free and until recently was on Apple's own hardware. Google only filed suit againt Apple because apparently that's the only way they'll talk to any other company.
Apple on the other hand constantly tries to block products and filed a 2 billion suit against Samsung. On top of that they remove any competition from the Istore. Why aren't they doing anything about that?
PS I would make fun of MS but they don't try to block products like Apple, they're market share is tiny, and they're open to everyone (they're not as draconian as Apple).
Kami3k
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 990
- 0
- 18,980
Looks like who ever is trying to do this in the FTC needs to be fired for being paid off by Apple.
Why else would the FTC go after a company for merging with another company when it was approved BY THE SAME GOVERNMENT! And go after Google and not Apple when it actively crushes competition through legal means.
Why else would the FTC go after a company for merging with another company when it was approved BY THE SAME GOVERNMENT! And go after Google and not Apple when it actively crushes competition through legal means.
abbadon_34
Distinguished
- Aug 7, 2008
- 1,869
- 0
- 19,960
[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]Wait hasn't Apple been trying to ban Samsung and HTC products pretty much world-wide with lawsuits already? Why check on Google when Apple was doing it first?[/citation]
The patents that Apple is leveraging are utility and design patents. They cover simple features that aren't required for the device to operate according to industry standards. They may be bullshit and of skeptical validity, but they're not standard-essential. The patents that Google and Samsung are using against Apple include so called standard-essential patents which are subject to significantly more oversight.
The patents that Apple is leveraging are utility and design patents. They cover simple features that aren't required for the device to operate according to industry standards. They may be bullshit and of skeptical validity, but they're not standard-essential. The patents that Google and Samsung are using against Apple include so called standard-essential patents which are subject to significantly more oversight.
JamesSneed
Judicious
- Oct 26, 2009
- 2,778
- 108
- 32,490
Yes but I think the level of scrutiny is also impacted by how much money the other party has that doesn't want to pay what Google is asking. Google asked for 2.25% of the selling price of devices, which is standard, what Motorola was asking prior, what Microsoft was paying albeit Microsoft cross licensed patents with Motorola so they didn't actually pay that 2.25% out of pocket. Apple wants to pay $1 per device, non retroactive which is a joke. Most companies Apples size trade patents with competitors to keep the competition going and costs down. Apple doesn't want to trade patents with Google or pretty much anyone else. Apple will shortly find out the entry fee into this game with companies that actually have standard essential patents on just about anything Apple wants to make is going to be high if they wont play nicely.
reprotected
Distinguished
- Oct 13, 2009
- 622
- 0
- 19,010
[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]Wait hasn't Apple been trying to ban Samsung and HTC products pretty much world-wide with lawsuits already? Why check on Google when Apple was doing it first?[/citation]
You get so much negative news about Apple, but barely anything from Google, so you'd obvious would hate Apple much more. You'd think Apple is the most anti-competitive company thanks to the stuff you read, but you really miss out on the bigger details and how real competition happens. You can have a million lawsuit news about a company in which it equates to no more than $2 billion in damages, compared to $20 billion. Google owns a search engine which has more than 7 times the current iOS users. Microsoft had this issue since they basically had a monopoly a decade ago, today Apple is anti-competitive, but not close to having monopoly in any field of technology, and Google basically owns the Internet and has a more potent competitive advantage. The government doesn't care about smaller companies, but they don't want monopolies. Simple as that.
You get so much negative news about Apple, but barely anything from Google, so you'd obvious would hate Apple much more. You'd think Apple is the most anti-competitive company thanks to the stuff you read, but you really miss out on the bigger details and how real competition happens. You can have a million lawsuit news about a company in which it equates to no more than $2 billion in damages, compared to $20 billion. Google owns a search engine which has more than 7 times the current iOS users. Microsoft had this issue since they basically had a monopoly a decade ago, today Apple is anti-competitive, but not close to having monopoly in any field of technology, and Google basically owns the Internet and has a more potent competitive advantage. The government doesn't care about smaller companies, but they don't want monopolies. Simple as that.
ericburnby
Distinguished
- Mar 4, 2010
- 636
- 0
- 18,980
Let's see, so many idiotic comments to choose from, where does one begin? Well, since they're all the same it doesn't really matter. You brainiacs should learn the difference between standard essential patents and non-essential patents.
Lets say Good Year invents a new method to make tires. They pitch it to other companies by making the patent part of a standard. Companies license Good Years' patent and pay $1 per tire for every tire they make. After a few years every company in the world switches their assembly lines over to make tires according to the Good Year patent.
Now that Good Year has everyone "depending" on their patent they cancel everyone's license and demand $15 per tire. Does anyone think its fair for a company to agree to terms and when they've got everyone dependent on them they hold companies "hostage" for more money?
This is exactly what Samsung and Motoroka are doing. Donate some patents to a SSO, agree to license them on FRAND terms, then go back on their word.
BTW, Apple and MS (for example) have a lot of FRAND patents they license to many companies. Can anyone come up with a single case where Apple abused their FRAND patents? Or MS?
Lets say Good Year invents a new method to make tires. They pitch it to other companies by making the patent part of a standard. Companies license Good Years' patent and pay $1 per tire for every tire they make. After a few years every company in the world switches their assembly lines over to make tires according to the Good Year patent.
Now that Good Year has everyone "depending" on their patent they cancel everyone's license and demand $15 per tire. Does anyone think its fair for a company to agree to terms and when they've got everyone dependent on them they hold companies "hostage" for more money?
This is exactly what Samsung and Motoroka are doing. Donate some patents to a SSO, agree to license them on FRAND terms, then go back on their word.
BTW, Apple and MS (for example) have a lot of FRAND patents they license to many companies. Can anyone come up with a single case where Apple abused their FRAND patents? Or MS?
Solandri
Illustrious
- Jan 4, 2012
- 4,919
- 98
- 39,240
[citation][nom]Pinhedd[/nom]The patents that Apple is leveraging are utility and design patents. They cover simple features that aren't required for the device to operate according to industry standards. They may be bullshit and of skeptical validity, but they're not standard-essential. The patents that Google and Samsung are using against Apple include so called standard-essential patents which are subject to significantly more oversight.[/citation]
Agreed. Except in Google/Motorola's case, Apple has refused to license the patents. They've just been selling their products without licensing. Their latest "offer" was $1 per device (a ridiculously low 0.2%) with no penalty for hundreds of millions of past devices for which they've illegally never paid a dime. What else is a patent-holder supposed to do when the other party won't play ball like this except seek a ban?
Yes some other companies are licensing for probably around $1 per device. But that's in exchange for cross-licensing other patents. Apple refuses to cross-license.
Agreed. Except in Google/Motorola's case, Apple has refused to license the patents. They've just been selling their products without licensing. Their latest "offer" was $1 per device (a ridiculously low 0.2%) with no penalty for hundreds of millions of past devices for which they've illegally never paid a dime. What else is a patent-holder supposed to do when the other party won't play ball like this except seek a ban?
Yes some other companies are licensing for probably around $1 per device. But that's in exchange for cross-licensing other patents. Apple refuses to cross-license.
dark_knight33
Distinguished
- Aug 16, 2006
- 391
- 0
- 18,780
tacobravo
Distinguished
- Feb 24, 2010
- 207
- 0
- 18,710
Apple should have got sued a lot earlier than what the FCC wants to do with Google. Apple for years have been trying to ban the competitors products in as many countries as they can. They need to be sued for billions since all their frivolous costs the taxpayers of every country untold millions of dollars, dollars in which could be used to better communities and stuff
Amazing. This is like punishing a man who has just been shot but is shooting back instead of the original gunman. It seems that the only reason to punish the man who had been shot is because he is using different ammo.
My plan to fix this is to put all the CEOs of all these tech companies in an arena and make them fight to the death and the tech company that wins gets to have it's way. Think of it like CEO Hunger Games.
My plan to fix this is to put all the CEOs of all these tech companies in an arena and make them fight to the death and the tech company that wins gets to have it's way. Think of it like CEO Hunger Games.
would be nice to see google file suit with the DOJ against apple and microsoft to take a cut of % from their sales for the amount of patents violated.
seems like a worth while way to settle any patent suit from now on if america is going down in socialism or communism, this is how it's got to be, just like NObamacare!
i think the FTC should first attend to the too big to fail banks anti trust busting first. they have more important things to attend to such as cable and telecom monopolies instead.
seems like a worth while way to settle any patent suit from now on if america is going down in socialism or communism, this is how it's got to be, just like NObamacare!
i think the FTC should first attend to the too big to fail banks anti trust busting first. they have more important things to attend to such as cable and telecom monopolies instead.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 33
-
-
Question New pc build r9 7900x3d rtx 4080 super no post only ram rgb turns on- Started by Harvey Durward
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
RTX 4070 vs RX 7900 GRE faceoff: Which mainstream graphics card is better?
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 72
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram