Samsung refuses to pay licenses to Microsoft after Nokia buyout Comments
- Anonymous
- p@g
More of the same from Shamesung. I hope Microsoft takes them to the cleaners.
- AnonD-326248
- mnS
The fact is; for every android device sold,to Microsoft goes 5 dollars! because android use some patents own by Redmond giant. That's a simple truth. I don't know what agreement has been made between them but in any case fee must be paid. Cheers
- kurotsuki
- sSV
No they can't. These Chinese OEM you named don't have business representative in the US and Europe. LG, HTC, Samsung does. This means that they are subject to US and Europe law which require them to abide their patent law.
- Striker
- 0EV
Poor Shamesunk. Not only is their profit shrinking, but now they face a court trial by Microsoft. They paid $1 billion to Apple, now Microsoft. Wellm they deserve it. Theft is never a factor for long-therm success.
- Anonymous
- Ibx
AnonD-66693, 02 Nov 2014Can you tell me whom is the real fault? Samsung or Microsoft? I can't understand the article. ... moreThat's the purpose of a trial. Evidence is produced and both sides put forth their arguments. You could always go look at the court filings instead of waiting on others to tell you what is right or wrong.
- AnonD-214913
- 39x
AnonD-299124, 02 Nov 2014Typical Android OEM. Stealing ideas from everyone. IF HTC has to pay Microspft and Apple ro... moreYou don't have any understanding at all. Go and research first. They don't pay royalties because they use android. They pay because they use the other companies patents.
- AnonD-299124
- 6u9
Typical Android OEM. Stealing ideas from everyone.
IF HTC has to pay Microspft and Apple royalty for every phone sold, so should Samsung
- Anonymous
- KxN
Smarter, 02 Nov 2014Samsung managers would be stupid to pay money to Microsoft. Chinese companies like Lenovo, Xia... morevery agre
- Smarter
- nin
Samsung managers would be stupid to pay money to Microsoft. Chinese companies like Lenovo, Xiaomi, TCL and so on pay nothing for patents, certifications and copyrights. Only dumb company pays for such things. If Samsung managers are clever they would be never pay a coin.
- AnonD-66693
- tR6
Anonymous, 02 Nov 2014My bad. I had a typo in there. The "u" and "i" are next to each other on... moreCan you tell me whom is the real fault? Samsung or Microsoft? I can't understand the article. My english is not great. XD
- Anonymous
- 4$v
AnonD-307870, 02 Nov 2014It's not a typo. Collusion- Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes ... moreMy bad. I had a typo in there. The "u" and "i" are next to each other on the keyboard. Yes, I meant "collusion," just as it is written in the article. Maybe you should take 3 more seconds and look up some of their price fixing scandals.
- django
- rAQ
Ploy by Samsung to negotiate the deal again.
Issues you get when you are a fast follower instead of innovator.
- Anonymous
- 7XX
Possibly they are scared (or cautious). I could just magine how Microsoft could allocate the money to research, development or projects and how Samsung could lose the money that could have been used for their own research, dev or projects. Haha
- Anonymous
- 0fG
This is not good MS. Not only do you not deserve it, Samsung just paid you over 1000 million dollars...
- kuro
- sSV
Let set aside the patents in question. I'm inclined to talking about the logic. From my stand point, what Samsung did is illogical. The previous case is, Samsung's Android devices infringe Microsoft patents. The must pay royalty for that. And to reduce the royalty cost, Samsung disclose development of Windows Phone devices to Microsoft as part of the deal. Now that Microsoft is a direct competitor, I agree to their point about collusion things. But what makes it illogical is, according to their past agreement, they MUST pay full royalty cost since the discount price is no longer relevant. Voiding royalty because patent holder is a direct competitor is absurd.
- AnonD-147377
- d%X
AnonD-53653, 02 Nov 2014Ah, so samsung scared of ms+nokia combo?They don't want to pay for something doesn't deserve to pay for.
Just read about those patents i don't know why Samsung forced to pay for this 1 billion per year.
They should call it gangs payments tuition not royalty payments, patent system is corrupted till the nose.
- AnonD-134497
- sSP
Nothing new considering how Samsung's famous for dragging itself into law suits. I love seeing Samsung going downhill aside loving Note 4.
- anonymous
- sGM
Z , 02 Nov 2014Shamsung stealing and copying all the time. Lolzzz yeah😉
- Anonymous
- 3I{
I thought I saw somewhere it's about $3 per phone. Wonder what it is Samsung has to pay Microsoft $3/phone for. Must be frustrating. Hope Samsung has or gets some patents they can charge Microsoft for.
- Lets go
- Ia9
Had Microsoft just bought Nokia and let it run as a standalone company, and just provided software this would not be an issue.
Samsung are "right" or maybe more right than Microsoft and as antitrust does factor into this imo.
With Microsoft now building Lumias and Samsung the Ativ, any technological breakthroughs e.g. Samsung discovers in say the Android Range which it wants to use on the Windows Ativ it has to tell Microsoft who now makes Lumias
Microsoft in trying to obliterate the Nokia brand from history has brought this upon itself and instead of trading on the Nokia name is now “all in” which is bad
Microsoft has sued Samsung for $6.9 million, the interest due on $1billion (aka s1, 000,000,000 or 0.69% of value)
“All in” now means if Microsoft loses all phone suppliers in a SIMILAR situation to Samsung also win, Samsung have nothing to lose and EVERYTHING to gain
Tip us
1.5m 109k
RSS
EV
Merch
Log in I forgot my password Sign up