Nokia and Apple settled their law suits over patent infringement out of court.
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/49560.php
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/nokia-likely-netted-600-million-plus-in-apple-patent-settlement/50590
It is said the settlement included a one-time payment between $550 million to $600 million. Apple and Nokia agree on some cross-licensing terms, with a patent license fee up to $11.5 per iPhone sold paid to Nokia. It looks like a victory to Nokia from the result. It is also in a way good for Apple to conclude this fight with Nokia. Based on the latest financial reports from both companies, as of Q2, 2011, Apple has $29.2 billion in cash or cash equivalents, while Nokia has about $16.5 billion. The amount of $600 million is approximately 2 percent of what Apple can pull out of its pocket. With the quarterly iPhone shipment reaches 18 million units, the royalty payment to Nokia is close to $210 million. With Q2 2011 EBITDA income at $7.9 billion, this is affordable to Apple. It is though a boost to Nokia's quarterly EBITDA income of $778 million.
At this point, Nokia has lost one quarter of its global cell phone market share (from 36% down to 27%) and over 50% of its smart phone market share (from around 55-60% to between 20-25%). Nokia lost not just market share, revenue, but also the waning cost advantage associated with scale. Did its patent portfolio protect the company and its shareholders from those aggressive competitors? This patent portfolio did not even help Nokia executives to keep their jobs.
There are two other threads of events worth watching for. One is the patent fight between Chines vendors Huawei and ZTE. Will this domestic dispute result in any legal precedent or will it settle out of court? http://www.cellular-news.com/story/49538.php
The other one is the patent auction by Nortel and Google's intention in Nortel's patents.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/technology/05google.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/14/us-nortel-idUSTRE75C5WT20110614
A complacent company sued an innovative company and get paid. Do patent laws really encourage innovations?
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/49560.php
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/nokia-likely-netted-600-million-plus-in-apple-patent-settlement/50590
It is said the settlement included a one-time payment between $550 million to $600 million. Apple and Nokia agree on some cross-licensing terms, with a patent license fee up to $11.5 per iPhone sold paid to Nokia. It looks like a victory to Nokia from the result. It is also in a way good for Apple to conclude this fight with Nokia. Based on the latest financial reports from both companies, as of Q2, 2011, Apple has $29.2 billion in cash or cash equivalents, while Nokia has about $16.5 billion. The amount of $600 million is approximately 2 percent of what Apple can pull out of its pocket. With the quarterly iPhone shipment reaches 18 million units, the royalty payment to Nokia is close to $210 million. With Q2 2011 EBITDA income at $7.9 billion, this is affordable to Apple. It is though a boost to Nokia's quarterly EBITDA income of $778 million.
At this point, Nokia has lost one quarter of its global cell phone market share (from 36% down to 27%) and over 50% of its smart phone market share (from around 55-60% to between 20-25%). Nokia lost not just market share, revenue, but also the waning cost advantage associated with scale. Did its patent portfolio protect the company and its shareholders from those aggressive competitors? This patent portfolio did not even help Nokia executives to keep their jobs.
There are two other threads of events worth watching for. One is the patent fight between Chines vendors Huawei and ZTE. Will this domestic dispute result in any legal precedent or will it settle out of court? http://www.cellular-news.com/story/49538.php
The other one is the patent auction by Nortel and Google's intention in Nortel's patents.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/technology/05google.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/14/us-nortel-idUSTRE75C5WT20110614
A complacent company sued an innovative company and get paid. Do patent laws really encourage innovations?
