While Microsoft believes it shouldn't pay more than $502,000 a year to license Motorola's video patents, the Google-owned smartphone manufacturer has demanded between $100 million and $125 million on an annual basis.
Court filings revealed that Microsoft is willing to pay as much as $502,000 per year to license Motorola's H.264 video patents. The software giant also said it would pay as much as $736,000 for Motorola's 802.11 wireless technology.
Motorola, however, doesn't want to settle with a one-off fee. It wants Microsoft to pay a percentage of its revenue stemming from the allegedly infringing products; it wants a 2.25 percent royalty on H.264 technology, which would range between $100 million and $125 million per year in fees.
The company is also demanding a royalty payment of 1.15 percent to 1.73 percent for its WiFi patents, which could possibly lead to further tens of millions of dollars per year.
Microsoft argued that its rival's H.264 and WiFi patents should be offered at a "fair rate" due to the fact that they're standard-essential intellectual property. Should businesses license standard-essential patents, they are required to request fees that are considered fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND).
The Windows creator has maintained its position regarding Motorola's 2.25 percent royalty request being unfair. The latter has also alleged that the Xbox 360 violates its patents as well. That said, a judge recently ruled that Moto will not be granted an injunction against Microsoft products in the U.S. and Germany.
Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Zak Islam is a freelance writer focusing on security, networking, and general computing. His work also appears at Digital Trends and Tom's Guide.
-
ojas ReplyCourt filings revealed that Microsoft is willing to pay as much as $502,000 per year to license Motorola's H.264 video patents. The software giant also said it would pay as much as $736,000 for Motorola's 802.11 wireless technology.
Motorola, however, doesn't want to settle with a one-off fee.
Yay go Zak!
:/ -
jaber2 It will all come back to Microsoft when it sues Google and Moto for their use of Microsoft patents.Reply -
ojas I know you want to pick on people, but what you think is wrong is correct. one time fee inplys once a year where no matter how much revanue they make the price is the same, as opposed to a % of revanue would consistantly change based on sales.Reply
-
-Jackson Replyojas I know you want to pick on people, but what you think is wrong is correct. one time fee inplys once a year where no matter how much revanue they make the price is the same, as opposed to a % of revanue would consistantly change based on sales.
Actually, it really depends on how you look at it; A large majority of the time, it is used to implicate a one-time only fee, hence the term "one-off". -
twelve25 john15v16Go get em' google! ...next up...apple...Reply
Then who is going to keep google in check? Google knows everything about everyone. I don't want them dominating the world, too. -
the1kingbob I didn't realize H.264 made up 2.25% of windows OS.... Come on, really? Microsoft owes them money, but 2.25% seems a bit crazy for something that isn't used often by a large portion of windows users. I can understand the wifi number a bit more, that feature is used quite often on most platforms.Reply -
pacomac Why should Motorola demand a percentage of the selling price. It costs no more to put these technologies in a cheap phone than an expensive one. This is just greed on the part of Motorolla, trying the same trick they played on Apple!Reply
Working on a percentage of the selling price means you have to work with a limited number of FRAND patents before you are all out of profit, no matter how high the selling price. How can anyone creat a top notch phone with all the latest technologies? -
DRosencraft Motoroa is reaching too far. I am all for a patent holder being fairly compensated for their patent. If someone else builds a new standard for implementing data transfers, they have the right to charge for its use. But seriously? $100-$125 million? A YEAR? Something a bit higher than $0.5 Million may be due, but a hundred million is overkill.Reply -
FSCx64 the1kingbobI didn't realize H.264 made up 2.25% of windows OS.... Come on, really? Microsoft owes them money, but 2.25% seems a bit crazy for something that isn't used often by a large portion of windows users. I can understand the wifi number a bit more, that feature is used quite often on most platforms.Reply
I don't think this is about money. I think this is a way for Motorola and Google to push M$ to cross license some of their patents. What I've understood right now $10 from every Android phone sold is going to Ballmers company.
If we think average Android phone price is 350, then 2,9% goes to M$. And I am sure Microsofts input towards Android is worth that 2,9 %...not.
I can be wrong.. wouldn't be the first time :D