This is my fourth post(2nd of this week).
I saw an article just now Samsung has made 10 year mutual license agreement with Cisco. And also, I believe they also made 10 year license with Google a while back. They all are related in some way, and so I feel that they are making unions to share these licenses. I always thought it was about Google v Apple not Apple v any other company. So as we can see from this event, we can see that a lot of these companies are joining unions to share licenses(right to use patent) in order to minimize the risk of being sued by each other.
It's interesting because they are somewhat related to one another, and yet they are different. The competitors are all signing cross-license pact in order to prevent litigation from occurring. It's crucial for Samsung because they owe $930 million in damages for violating Apple's patent. So in all, we can say that they are doing damage control trying to prevent further litigation like this from occurring.
The best solution is to not infringe on others' patents, although it's very difficult to do so now days.
If you guys want to check out the article. I've attached a link below.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579365220297306100?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304680904579365220297306100.html
That was a pretty interesting article. I believe collaboration among companies is a really good thing, and it needs to happen more often. Collaboration generally leads to benefits for both of the companies, which is why we need to see less patent litigation and more collaboration.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Samsung and Google, I think it makes perfect sense for them to join in a pact. After all, Samsung smartphones carry Android, and Android is made by Google. If a hardware company designs a good smartphone and a software company designs a good operating system, it seems to both of their benefits to team up. And sharing patents is a great way of showing that you're both on the same side.
ReplyDeleteWhat you mentioned in your first paragraph is definitely important, especially for patents in the smartphone and mobile devices area. The interesting thing about smartphones and mobile devices is that they are so widely used. Almost everybody owns a smartphone nowadays. This was not the case several years ago. Back then, it was a luxury to own a smartphone-- to be able to listen to music, play games, go on the internet, all in one device. Another trend that I have noticed is that parents are giving smartphones to their children at an earlier age than before. This further leads to the increase in the total percentage of the population that owns smartphones. Thus, as you mentioned in your blog post, it makes sense that companies need to join unions to share licenses in order to minimize the risk of being sued by each other. I am sure the whole situation is much more complicated than it seems at a first glance (and as the web diagrams of which company is suing which company show). And I definitely agree that it is difficult to not infringe on other's patents, especially when some of the patents are so simple as the shape of the phone! It definitely makes invention more difficult to be constantly worried about not infringing on what is already patented!
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, I think collaboration and cross-licensing suggests that companies are spending money (money which comes from consumers) insuring themselves against litigation, because patents are complicated and hard to completely avoid infringing. I also think that cross-licensing hurts new startups who don't have elaborate patent portfolios to make such a deal, and allows larger companies (who cross-license with each other) to use the threat of patent lawsuits to keep startups out of the market.
ReplyDeleteThose are excellent points to consider, Dara.
Delete