

Microsoft Files Motion in Apple v. Samsung to Hide Patent License Terms - mtgx
http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120727084323510

======
tzs
Note that Motorola (i.e., Google) is also filing a motion to hide the terms of
their license with Samsung, as is RIM and Qualcomm. There's nothing special
about Microsoft here except Groklaw is anti-Microsoft so Microsoft is the one
that gets mentioned in the headline.

~~~
jkn
Seems to me that the article singles out Microsoft because it puts this motion
in the context of Microsoft making secret patent deals with Android
manufacturers:

 _I seriously want to see those license terms, and I'd go so far as to suggest
that the public has a right to know what those terms are, particularly future
victims of Microsoft's patent strategy, and I know you want to know this too,
because we've all heard the rumors that Microsoft licenses on very, very low
royalties, just to be able to say to the world that Android/Linux folks are
paying Microsoft for its patents. I'd love to know if that is true. Plus, if
Microsoft paid for Samsung's FRAND patents the fee Samsung is asking Apple
for, on what basis would Microsoft argue in its litigation against Motorola,
that FRAND patents should be paid for at a greatly reduced royalty?_

~~~
ChuckMcM
This.

I think it was more in line with wanting to know how much Microsoft is
charging. I suspect its like salary negotiations where you don't want the
other side to know what you've already agreed to with others since that would
give them an advantage in the pricing discussion. Same with patent licenses.

------
mladenkovacevic
I wouldn't be surprised is Samsung is not paying anything to Microsoft for the
IP in question but has instead agreed to commit some of its smartphone
production line to Windows phones (and this is what Microsoft wants to hide)

