We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

Microsoft V Motorola


rdave13
Resolved

Likes # 0

Another patent 'war' erupts with a possible threat to the X-Box.X-Box banned?.

Now another giant is involved, Google buys Motorola. Whatever happens I suppose it's the customers that eventually pays the cost for these lawsuits.

Like this post
Aitchbee

Likes # 0

I don't give a hoot.

Like this post
Woolwell

Likes # 0

AitchBEE - If you don't give a hoot then don't post. Meaningless posts are irritating.

Paying for lawsuits has to come out of profits/income. Profits come from the customers. So the customer pays.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

"Paying for lawsuits has to come out of profits/income. Profits come from the customers. So the customer pays."

Actually the shareholders pay - or rather they don't receive.

Products have to be priced competitively, so consumers will buy them. A company can't simply hike selling prices in order to offset the costs of legal battles. Those costs do impact on company profits, and therefore on shareholder dividends - they don't directly affect consumers.

Like this post  
Woolwell

Likes # 0

FE - Of course you're correct and I should have known that.

However there must come a time when the large shareholders will say enough is enough.

Like this post
wiz-king

Likes # 0

Many of these cases are settled out of court - it's a game of bluff where both firms know that neither of them will 'win' and they are strutting their stuff to gain maximum profit with minimum loss.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

wiz-king

And at the same time, legal companies are making large amounts of money in these type of cases, which of cause, someone as to pay?.

Off subject, but I still recall the Kodak DX3700 camera saga, and how the legal people (from both sides of the pond), and the UK Trading Standards dealt with that?.

Like this post
rdave13

Likes # 0

I'm puzzled that these big companies, with their legal teams, continually use other patented apps this way. Do they knowingly do it, knowing that there will be a law suit, and at the final settlement, whether out of court or not, they get a guarantee of permission to use these patents? Possibly just applying to use these patents would result in refusal and take time?

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

"guarantee of permission to use these patents?"

The world's an expanding place, and I think that you might have the answer from perhaps China?.

Like this post
interzone55

Likes # 0

I think the fault ultimately lies with the US Patent Office, which will issue patents without checking.

Kodak have now started to use the courts as a source of revenue, but this week a Judge ruled against Kodak in a case against RIM (Blackberry) and Apple, as the Patent in question was invalid on the grounds of "Obviousness"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/22/applerimkodak_patents/

Like this post
finerty

Likes # 0

woolwell what is your going concern over this issue, do you have shares or some kind of monetary interest?

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

iPhone 6 release date, price, specs and new features: Invite confirms 9 September launch

IDG UK Sites

Nostalgia time: Top 10 best selling mobile phones in history

IDG UK Sites

How Ford designs next-generation cars at its Melbourne Design Centre

IDG UK Sites

iPhone 6 release date, rumours, video, UK price & images: iPhone launch event confirmed for 9...