Why would the alliance be so desperate to stop Google? The FT article provides a startlingly simple answer: Google has a thin patent collection compared to its principal competitors. The financial implications of patent control have escalated as mobile computing and smartphone popularity dramatically increase on an annual basis. Microsoft, for example, is now charging a per-unit fee for each Android-capable unit made by selected handset manufacturers. It's a gold mine for Microsoft, which really doesn't have to do much of anything except litigate and collect. Apple, for its part, a story originally reported by Bloomberg News noted a recent FTC ruling in favor of Steve Jobs' firm against an Android handset maker for patent infringement.
As for these extra costs, expect a product price bump, so that these payments are embedded in the overall retail or wholesale rates.
When Yahoo's Jerry Yang stupidly torpedoed Microsoft's bid to acquire his firm, he opened the door to Google's continued drive to effectively become a search monopoly. We are now at the point where "google" is unthinkingly used as a transitive verb to generically identify online search technique. Once Google entered the smartphone business, its affected major competitors realized they were in for a fight. Ironically, the FT piece characterized the latest Nortel patent battle as Google's "Waterloo." What wasn't said was that it took a grand alliance to take on the Napoleon from Mountain View.
The image at the top of the post is from Ocean Tomo. According to its corporate website, Ocean Tomo "provides financial services and products related to intellectual property...." In April, 2011, an Ocean Tomo press release discussed in some detail the issues involving Google's conjectured bidding on Nortel patents.
No comments:
Post a Comment