Jury reckons Motorola wasn't 'fair and reasonable' to Microsoft

Googorola to hand over $14m after trying to charge excessive patent fees


Microsoft has said that a Washington jury had agreed with its claim that Google-owned Motorola had broken its promises to standards-setting bodies to license its standards-essential patents at fair and reasonable rates.

The jury awarded Redmond $14m in damages, around half of what it had asked for. Most of this, $11m, is to pay Microsoft's costs for having had to relocate a warehouse in Germany after it was served with an injunction to stop selling some of its products there after Motorola won a case in the country's courts. The rest of the money is to recompense it for the legal fees it coughed while fighting the injunction.

"This is a landmark win for all who want products that are affordable and work well together," Microsoft said in a statement. "The jury's verdict is the latest in a growing list of decisions by regulators and courts telling Google to stop abusing patents."

Googorola has said that it will appeal the jury's decision.

"We're disappointed in this outcome, but look forward to an appeal of the new legal issues raised in this case," the phone company said, according to Reuters. "In the meantime, we'll focus on building great products that people love."

Microsoft has been totting up its wins against Moto's attempts to use standards-essential patents in court. Earlier this year, a US judge ruled that the rate the company was trying to get out of Microsoft for wireless and video tech used in Xboxes was too damn high and pinned the figure at around $1.8m annually, rather than the $4bn a year Moto was trying for.

In this trial, Microsoft argued that Moto had breached its standards duties by trying to claim royalties that were "wildly excessive".

"While a seller may be willing to come down from an opening offer, that does not mean that any offer is commercially reasonable just because negotiation might follow," Microsoft told the court. "Beyond the yawning chasm that separates Motorola’s demands from the RAND royalty, the evidence otherwise confirms that Motorola’s demands were completely unfounded and commercially unreasonable." ®


Other stories you might like

  • Azure issues not adequately fixed for months, complain bug hunters
    Redmond kicks off Patch Tuesday with a months-old flaw fix

    Updated Two security vendors – Orca Security and Tenable – have accused Microsoft of unnecessarily putting customers' data and cloud environments at risk by taking far too long to fix critical vulnerabilities in Azure.

    In a blog published today, Orca Security researcher Tzah Pahima claimed it took Microsoft several months to fully resolve a security flaw in Azure's Synapse Analytics that he discovered in January. 

    And in a separate blog published on Monday, Tenable CEO Amit Yoran called out Redmond for its lack of response to – and transparency around – two other vulnerabilities that could be exploited by anyone using Azure Synapse. 

    Continue reading
  • Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near
    Overhaul of Chrome add-ons set for January, Google says it's for all our own good

    Special report Seven months from now, assuming all goes as planned, Google Chrome will drop support for its legacy extension platform, known as Manifest v2 (Mv2). This is significant if you use a browser extension to, for instance, filter out certain kinds of content and safeguard your privacy.

    Google's Chrome Web Store is supposed to stop accepting Mv2 extension submissions sometime this month. As of January 2023, Chrome will stop running extensions created using Mv2, with limited exceptions for enterprise versions of Chrome operating under corporate policy. And by June 2023, even enterprise versions of Chrome will prevent Mv2 extensions from running.

    The anticipated result will be fewer extensions and less innovation, according to several extension developers.

    Continue reading
  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022