Ericsson Sues Apple Again Over 5G Patent Licensing (reuters.com) 20
Sweden's Ericsson has filed another set of patent infringement lawsuits against Apple in the latest salvo between the two companies over royalty payment for use of 5G wireless patents in iPhones. From a report: Both companies have already sued each other in the United States as negotiations failed over the renewal of a seven-year licensing contract for telecoms patents first struck in 2015. Ericsson sued first in October, claiming that Apple was trying to improperly cut down the royalty rates. The iPhone maker then filed a lawsuit in December accusing the Swedish company of using "strong-arm tactics" to renew patents. "Ericsson has refused to negotiate fair terms for renewing our patent licensing agreement, and instead has been suing Apple around the world to extort excessive royalties ... we are asking the court to help determine a fair price," an Apple spokesman said on Tuesday. Patent lawsuits are quite common among technology companies because every dollar saved could amount to significant amounts over the duration of the agreement, with companies such as Ericsson charging $2.50 to $5 for every 5G handset.
ffs apple (Score:2)
OK (Score:1)
My current phone company also want to charge me a premium for 5G access and I could not care less about 5G. I think I will be happier with the dollar than paying for 5G, so I wouldn't mind if Apple did not support 5G.
Careful, Tim (Score:2)
""Ericsson has refused to negotiate fair terms for renewing our patent licensing agreement, and instead has been suing Apple around the world to extort excessive royalties"
Better be careful using this kind of wording in public - it might come back to bite you in the ass in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
More or less my thought exactly: anybody selling things via apps on iPhone could use the same words against Apple themselves, just alter the company names and you are good to go...
Also, this [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
But all of this is little more than posturing. The same shit happened several years ago in a similar situation [techcrunch.com] and I'm sure all of the sa
$2.50 to $5.00 (Score:4, Insightful)
At $2.50 to $5.00 that is about 0.5% of the cost of the phone. Apple seems to think that 30% is fair. Maybe they can't understand numbers that small.
Re: (Score:1)
On the other hand, this double, triple, quadruple dipping on patent licenses is bullshit.
When the patent holder is paid their $5 fee, that one instance built with it should be paid for, period.
Once Qualcomm pays their $5 per chip, that chip should be paid for, done and done.
Being allowed to charge another patent fee to the purchaser of that Qualcomm chip (apple in this case) after it was paid for is bullshit.
The worst part, the end-user that purchases a cell phone is ALSO on the hook to pay Ericsonn another
Re: (Score:3)
Whole lotta bullshit there. When Qualcomm pays their $5, that exhausts ONLY the patents that Qualcomm licensed (the technology in the chip). There can be other patented methods of USING the chip, those patents may be held by Ericsson, Qualcomm, Apple, or anyone else. If Apple (or anyone else) uses THOSE patents they must also be licensed. That is not 'double-dipping', it is paying for two different licenses for two different things covered by two different patents.
And the crap about the end user or the s
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with most of what you said, but double dipping is actually a thing, most famously with Qualcomm, but not in the way that was suggested.
Qualcomm owns a whole lot of patents that cover the general space occupied by smartphones. A company such as Apple has manufacturing partners who have to pay Qualcomm a fee for the right to manufacture chips that contain Qualcomm-patented technologies. Separately and subsequent to that, the company in Apple’s position is then on the hook, at least according to
Re: $2.50 to $5.00 (Score:2)
Ericcson's Translation (Score:1)
Our company is worth $9 billion, down a billion since the US DOJ fined us for bribing foreign officials.
Apple is worth $300 billion. Looks like a good place to make up that lost billion.
Court to set price? (Score:1)
They are asking the Court to set a "fair price"? Can we do the same for Apple hardware please then? I thought the free market set prices, including patent licensing prices.
Re: (Score:3)
They are asking the Court to set a "fair price"? Can we do the same for Apple hardware please then? I thought the free market set prices, including patent licensing prices.
In this case, the patents are part of the telecom standards (3G, 4G, 5G), for which Ericsson is one of largest contributors. As such, Apple needs the patents - at least most of them. To be allowed to contribute knowledge (and thus patents) to a standard, Ericsson (and every other contributor) has agreed to license the patents under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) [wikipedia.org] terms.
Here, Apple just wants to pay less than they used to under the old agreement.
When your business model is patents... (Score:1)
You're already scum.
Re: (Score:3)
You're already scum.
Ericsson is one of the biggest producers of telecommunications gear on the backend - the gear that telcos use and you connect to. They were one of the biggest contributors to the development of the 5G standard. So rather than saying that patents is their business model, you could say that innovation is.
Ericsson deserves ... (Score:2)