Despite the continued injunction motions and appeal requests following the Apple vs. Samsung high profile case, additional information continues to be leaked out that reveals new aspects that hadn’t been brought to light during the trial. According to recently-filed court documents, Apple tried to offer Samsung a cross-licensing deal involving 3G/UMTS patents back in April in an effort to avoid litigation. Now interesting information from these documents are being shared publicly. AppleInsider has reported:
“A recently unredacted letter from Apple’s property licensing director Boris Teksler to his counterpart at Samsung, Seongwoo Kim, described a reciprocal deal in which each company would pay royalty rates for the other’s 3G/UMTS wireless patents under the same FRAND principles. The letter, which was included in a flurry of post-trial filings, was dated April 30, 2012, just three months before the Apple v. Samsung jury trial began.”
FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory), are a set of licensing obligations that are enforced by standard-setting organizations. These rules say that if you own patents that cover industry-essential inventions, you must license them out at a fair price. Apple states they wanted to work it out with Samsung in hopes of avoiding the trial that eventually cost Samsung over $1 Billion.
AppleInsider has the the entire letter that was intended for Teksler, however, some additional interesting excerpts were taken:
“Apple is willing to license its declared-essential UMTS patents to Samsung on license terms that rely on the price of baseband chips as the FRAND royalty base, and a rate that reflects Apple’s share of the total declared UMTS-essential patents (and all patents required for standards for which UMTS is backward-compatible, such as GSM)–provided that Samsung reciprocally agrees to this same, common royalty base, and same methodological approach to royalty rate, in licensing its declared-essential patents to Apple.”
Apple estimates that the deal would result in a $.33 per unit royalty for its patents, and vice versa. This deal ends up being much lower than Samsung’s original request of 2.4% of the average selling price per unit. Apple, however, states that it has yet to see evidence that any company has ever paid that much for a FRAND royalty though. Never the less, the original negotiations made no headway, as Samsung still tried to assert its 3G-related patents against Apple in the trial. Now Samsung just filed a lawsuit against Apple over the 4G tech it used in the iPhone 5 and it begs the question as to how far will this legal litigation between the 2 companies go.
Stay tuned to DroidDog for continued coverage of the Apple vs. Samsung legal battle.