Google wanted 4 billion a year from microsoft. An anil judge gave them 1.8 million per yr.
That judge is a lous. Motorola spent millions on research and development, and surely deserved more than 1.8 million a year.
They also made a mistake in granting a 14 million dollar penalty for the way they try to license.
With some companies, how else can you make them pay for using your technology.
for crying out loud, judge jackson wouldnt give vrng for any google infringement, for infringement before they sued google.
so one judge says it bad to force companies to sue, yet another judge says you can't collect from court, until the day you file a lawsuit.
Sure googles demands were outrageous. But so was microsofts offer, since they apparently didnt offer anything.
If we live in a world where essential patents only give you 1.8 mil a year, then technology will dry up, and we'll go back to living in caves.
The fair thing to do would be get a decent value for the license. Then penalize google half of what they over charged, and penalize microsoft half of what they under offered. Then you get penalized for asking outrageous amounts, and you get penalized for using essential patents, and not even make a valid offer.
That gives companies a lot of incentive to act professionally.
Just think if idcc got 1.8 mil a yr from nokia/microsoft for essential patents. it would only take 100 years just to get back their legal fees.
When you license patents on a FRAND basis that are part of a $20 chip, you get royalties based on that, not on the $400 box the chip goes in. Imagine if the holder of a tire manufacturing patent wanted 2% of the price of a car.