Lemm said:
Apple and Microsoft ganged up to pay more than Google alone. It didn’t have a choice. They ended up going for over 5 billion dollars which is over 5 times what the patent portfolio was estimated to be originally.
What the article you posted conveniently ignores is the fact that Google partnered with Intel shortly after Apple partnered with RIM, EMC, Ericsson, Sony, and Microsoft. That’s a little lopsided, but not by much. Keep in mind, Google could have just as easily teamed up with Microsoft et al but chose not to even consider it. They also completely ignored RPX which could have tapped its member companies and gotten an incredibly large sum of cash very quickly.
As to the “5 times larger” thing, Google placed an opening bid of $900 million which was right at what the estimated value was. Not only is this stupid but it also tipped their hand. They let their competitors know three things that will destroy you in RL bidding: that you really want it, that you think it’s valuable, and that you’re willing to pay alot for it. When your direct competitor thinks something is valuable, and that something can actually be used against you, you *edited* well better buy it before they do. Several tech articles state that the existing patent licenses would have been honored, don’t believe it for a second. If that were true the winners wouldn’t be able to start charging patent licensing fees for Android devices.
What I find interesting is that the DoJ had determined that if Google won that the deal would be ok but they had to investigate Apple’s patent portfolio before approving them to enter the bidding. We’re talking about over 6000 patents, why would ANY auction of this magnitude be legal?
Also, if Google had won it would be doing the exact same thing. And I quote: “If successful, we hope this portfolio will not only create a disincentive for others to sue Google…” In other words, with this portfolio, if Microsoft or Apple were to sue Google over whatever Google would be able to leverage the patents and force them to back off out of fear of patent license revocation.
Unlike the Novell auction, where the DoJ forced most of the patents to be given back, I don’t think this one will be overturned. The DoJ pre-approved every bidder before the auction started and thus placed their seal of approval on any of them winning. I wouldn’t say it’s entirely out of the realm of possibility but if the DoJ is asked to pre-approve all bidders and then later reneges on that I can’t imagine any company placing any faith at all in their ability to monitor these things in an unbiased and impartial manner.