Tuesday, December 06, 2016
Search
  
Submit your own News for
inclusion in our Site.
Click here...
Breaking News
Meizu m5 Note Comes With A 5.5-inch 1080p Display And A Large Battery
Korean Researchers Develop Flexible and Transparent Semiconductors
New BenQ SW320 Flagship Photographer Monitor Released
Nanya Completes Acquisition of Micron Shares
Facebook, Twitter And Google Are Partnering To Help Curb Spread of Online Terrorist Content
Microsoft Is Careful With New Chatbot Zo, Now Available For Testing
Android 7.1.1 Update Coming To Google Smartphones
Avalanche Network Dismantled in Cyber Operation
Active Discussions
Which of these DVD media are the best, most durable?
How to back up a PS2 DL game
Copy a protected DVD?
roxio issues with xp pro
Help make DVDInfoPro better with dvdinfomantis!!!
menu making
Optiarc AD-7260S review
cdrw trouble
 Home > News > Mobiles > EU Regu...
Last 7 Days News : SU MO TU WE TH FR SA All News

Monday, May 06, 2013
EU Regulators Say Google-owned Motorola Abused Its Position


The European Commission (EC) said it believed Motorola Mobility, a unit of Google, was abusing its market position by seeking and enforcing an injunction against Apple in Germany over patents essential to mobile phone standards.

The Commission has informed Motorola Mobility of its preliminary view that the company's seeking and enforcing of an injunction against Apple in Germany on the basis of its mobile phone standard-essential patents ("SEPs") amounts to an abuse of a dominant position prohibited by EU antitrust rules. While recourse to injunctions is a possible remedy for patent infringements, such conduct may be abusive where SEPs are concerned and the potential licensee is willing to enter into a licence on Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (so-called "FRAND") terms. In such a situation, the Commission considers at this stage that dominant SEP holders should not have recourse to injunctions, which generally involve a prohibition to sell the product infringing the patent, in order to distort licensing negotiations and impose unjustified licensing terms on patent licensees. Such misuse of SEPs could ultimately harm consumers. As a note, the sending of a Statement of Objections does not prejudge the final outcome of the investigation.

Commission Vice President in charge of competition policy Joaquin Almunia said: "The protection of intellectual property is a cornerstone of innovation and growth. But so is competition. I think that companies should spend their time innovating and competing on the merits of the products they offer - not misusing their intellectual property rights to hold up competitors to the detriment of innovation and consumer choice."

Standards bodies generally require members to commit to license on FRAND terms the patents that they have declared essential for a standard. This commitment is designed to ensure effective access to a standard for all market players and to prevent "hold-up" by a single SEP holder. Indeed, access to those patents which are standard-essential is a precondition for any company to sell interoperable products in the market. Such access allows consumers to have a wider choice of interoperable products while ensuring that SEP holders are adequately remunerated for their intellectual property.

The Motorola Mobility SEPs in question relate to the European Telecommunications Standardisation Institute's (ETSI) GPRS standard, part of the GSM standard, which is a key industry standard for mobile and wireless communications. When this standard was adopted in Europe, Motorola Mobility gave a commitment that it would license the patents which it had declared essential to the standard on FRAND terms. Nevertheless, Motorola Mobility sought an injunction against Apple in Germany on the basis of a GPRS SEP and, after the injunction was granted, went on to enforce it, even when Apple had declared that it would be willing to be bound by a determination of the FRAND royalties by the German court.

The Statement of Objections sets out the Commission's preliminary view that under the specific circumstances of this case - a previous commitment to license SEPs on FRAND terms and the agreement of Apple to accept a binding determination of the terms of a FRAND licence for SEPs by a third party - recourse to injunctions harms competition. The Commission is concerned that the threat of injunctions can distort licensing negotiations and lead to licensing terms that the licensee of the SEP would not have accepted absent this threat. This would lead to less consumer choice.

The Commission opened the investigation in April 2012.


Previous
Next
Semiconductor Sales On The Rise        All News        Samsung Introduces the GALAXY Core
Hulu Plus Now on Windows Phone 8     Mobiles News      Samsung Introduces the GALAXY Core

Get RSS feed Easy Print E-Mail this Message

Related News
Facebook, Twitter And Google Are Partnering To Help Curb Spread of Online Terrorist Content
Google Launches New Personal Safety App
Apple Sent Letter NHTSA Asking About Autonomous Vehicle Guidelines
Apple Blames Battery For Random iPhone 6s Shutdowns
Researcher Bypasses The iOS Activation Lock
Apple To Use Drones To Collect Maps Data, Progresses With Interior Mapping Project
Google Detects Diabetic Eye Disease With Machine Learning
New Report Suggests A Curved iPhone Is In The Works
Apple's Black Friday "Deals" Are Just Up To $150 Gift Cards
LG Innotek To Develop 3D Smartphone Camera With Apple
Apple Could Not Move iPhone Production To The U.S.
Google Will Tell You If Your Favorite Bar Is Crowded

Most Popular News
 
Home | News | All News | Reviews | Articles | Guides | Download | Expert Area | Forum | Site Info
Site best viewed at 1024x768+ - CDRINFO.COM 1998-2016 - All rights reserved -
Privacy policy - Contact Us .