Months before the California patent litigation Apple Samsung has proposed an agreement to cross-license essential patents on FRAND terms mobile. The iPhone maker Samsung wanted to be dissuaded from its licensing requirement for UMTS patents in the amount of 2.4 percent. But even he had previously requested from Samsung far higher payments for its entire patent portfolio and did not move away from these claims.
The offer for a patent agreement was known as Judge Lucy Koh did not meet the needs of companies of secrecy and releasing the document for publication. Boris Teksler at Apple responsible for patent licensing and patent strategy, offered Samsung in late April in writing, its relevant patents classified as standard (“fair, resonable and non discrimiminatory”) on reasonable FRAND terms to license. He estimated the cost incurred for Samsung royalty payments to 33 cents per unit.
In return demanded Teksler that Samsung had also lowered its demands to the lower level of FRAND essential mobile patents. Apples offer applies “if Samsung mutually explained to apply the same standard fee basis ready,” says the letter.
Apple demanded a response to 7 May 2012. A response from Samsung was not known, but it was obviously not an agreement. Neither Samsung nor Apple want to comment on the former operations.
The controversy over the so-called FRAND patents describing indispensable standards of mobile patents, but was only a sideshow. As of court documents can further be seen, Apple had previously asked for the use of its intellectual property by Samsung, a fee of $ 30 per phone and $ 40 a tablet. For a reciprocal licensing agreement that would have allowed Apple access to Samsung’s rights, there should be a reduction of 20 percent. In addition, Apple wanted. Not only royalties for Samsung’s Android smartphones, but also for mobile phones with Microsoft’s Windows Phone