Apple, what about actually licensing tech developed by other companies/entities as opposed to implementing it in your devices without notification or paying for the licensing? Funny you're fine suing over something as ubiquitous as device form factor and UI layout, but when it comes to using comm. technology protocols developed by others, you all of a sudden scream "not fair!"
I don't like how many people assume the aire of "apple-hater" anytime a headline involving Apple comes up (namely because most other companies behave in many similar ways as Apple). But this motion on Apple's part really irks me on principle.
I think their demands are a bit on the demanding side:
Quote:
The company's request lists three specific points:
-Parties should only be able to claim an "appropriate royalty rate", both at the start and end of negotiations.
-There should be a "common royalty base" - in other words, the patent's value should be determined as a percentage of the cost of the relevant components rather than the device as a whole.
-Patent owners should commit to a "no injunction" policy under which they do not seek to block the sale or shipments of rivals' equipment on the basis of a Frand-patent dispute.
I don't like the second bullet point. The thing is though, the device wouldn't be able to function without the patented item(s)--therein contributes to the value of the patent if a device using that technology has intrinsic value. And it completely ignores the intellectual contributions that go into developing something rather than just raw costs. Going back to previous non-FRAND disputes on apple's part, their patents on form-factor vs. UI layout has zero component cost. What would be the value of licensing THAT patent?
I also don't like the third bullet point, but less so than the second one.
I'd rather the whole patent system be overhauled, but of course we know that's not going to happen anytime soon...
write a letter to the UN 
