In papers filed in the Western District Court of Wisconsin on Thursday, Apple and Google
expressed broad agreement to use binding arbitration to resolve their
issues surrounding standards essential patents. The immediate scope of
the negotiations involve patent disputes between Apple and Google’s
recently acquired Motorola Mobility
division, but this move can be seen as a key step towards resolving the
broader battle between Apple and the makers of Android devices in
general.
Bloomberg reported on the development yesterday,and quoted Strategy Analytics analyst Alex
Spektor on its broader implications: “It’s in everyone’s best interest
in the industry to pull back and reach some sort of equilibrium. Google
could offer a certain level of protection to licensees who comply with
whatever standard it puts in place.”
In contrast to Steve Jobs‘ “thermonuclear” war on Android, Tim Cook‘s apparent willingness to arbitrate shows yet another way that Apple is readjusting its priorities. Recent management shakeups
have remade Apple’s org chart to resolve some underlying tensions
carried over from the Jobs era, and the patent war has certainly been a
problematic part of that legacy.
Resolving the standards essential patents between the two companies
would simplify the battlefield and make it easier to negotiate the
remaining disputes. By law, any patents that are deemed to be necessary
to make a standards compliant product must be licensed by the patent
owner at fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. In
terms of mobile devices, these include patents related to basic
connectivity like 2G, 3G, LTE and WiFi. Google has taken it farther and
proposed that, “The patents covered by the arbitration… [include] other
royalty-bearing standards, regardless of whether they were deemed
essential.”
There are differences between the companies’ positions, notably about
a German “Orange Book” case already in process, but none seem like
deal-breakers. Both companies must have realized that they have a common
interest in making peace. As contentious as their relationship has
been, they must understand at this point that they are the two big
winners in mobile and have more to gain by consolidating that position
than in continuing to bash each others brains out. Essentially, Apple is
the high-margin winner, since it actually makes substantial money from
each unit sold. Google is the low-margin winner, because it makes money
off of services that run on all Android devices, even if the
manufacturers of those devices make little.
The willingness to settle may also be an acknowledgement that Google
won the Android chess match through a clever turn on open source
practices. By giving away the Android OS software for free, they were
able to definitively distance themselves from any direct claim that they
are profiting from its use. Google is wired into Android in a
multiplicity of ways (and makes money on all of them), but all through
services that handset makers choose to make use of. For Apple, there’s
just no check mate in sight.
The other factor in this endgame may be Mozilla, or the disruptive potential of a true open source alternative emerging. Firefox OS is currently in version 0.7 and has just released a desktop simulator
that developers can use to preview apps written for the new platform
due to be released some time in 2013. Mozilla’s OS will run on web
standard APIs that will mean that apps authored for Firefox OS will work
as web apps on all platforms. Mozilla has yet to get developers very
interested in developing for Firefox OS, but improvements in the
performance of web apps overall (see my recent story on Famo.us for an example of how far this has come) may change that sentiment quickly.
Apple and Google, the owners of the two leading “native” mobile
platforms have common cause to protect their turf both from the open web
and any other disruptive curveball. You have only to look at the new $20 tablet being rolled out to educate India’s youth to see how quickly both iOS and Android could become unsustainably expensive.
I welcome the resolution of the “thermonuclear” war. Now that it is
clear that annihilation is not possible, cooperation is a better
strategy. Perhaps Apple can use patent resolution as a starting point
for a more sensible policy towards making good use of Google’s software
and services, rather than banishing them on political grounds. The
companies may never become true friends, but FRAND is a good place to
start.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét