Microsoft vs. Samsung, Explained - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Mobile // Mobile Devices
News
8/4/2014
03:15 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Microsoft vs. Samsung, Explained

Microsoft claims Samsung is trying to renege on its obligation to pay patent licensing fees. Could the billions Microsoft earns from Android-related patents be at stake?

5 Inexpensive Smartphones: No Perfect Choice
5 Inexpensive Smartphones: No Perfect Choice
(Click image for larger view and slideshow.)

Microsoft filed a lawsuit late last week against Samsung, alleging the South Korean electronics giant has refused to pay interest on late patent royalty payments and threatened to withhold future payments.

The royalties are tied a three-year-old cross-licensing agreement that calls for Samsung to pay Microsoft an undisclosed fee for every Android smartphone or tablet that Samsung sells. Though Android is a Google offering, Microsoft claims a wide range of patents related to the OS and has signed licensing agreements with many Android device makers.

In the lawsuit, Microsoft alleges that Samsung not only delayed royalty payments that were due last fall, but also refused to pay interest after finally remitting the late payments. Microsoft further claims that Samsung considers Microsoft's acquisition of Nokia's device business to be a breach of contract.

[Microsoft vows to fight ruling that it must release emails in foreign data center. Read Microsoft Privacy Case: What's At Stake?]

According to Microsoft, Samsung has tried to use the alleged contractual violation as a justification to cease payments. Samsung has also purportedly asked Korean authorities to eliminate the company's obligation to pay future fees. Microsoft claims that if Korean regulators attempt such a move, it would not pass legal muster. Samsung, for its part, hasn't said much, other than that it is looking into Microsoft's complaints.

In a blog post, Microsoft corporate VP and deputy general counsel David Howard alternated between diplomatic language and more pointed accusations. He took pains, for example, to paint the lawsuit as an almost routine disagreement between large companies.

"We don't take lightly filing a legal action, especially against a company with which we've enjoyed a long and productive partnership. Unfortunately, even partners sometimes disagree," he wrote. Elsewhere, he emphasized that Microsoft "values and respects" its partnership with Samsung and expects it to continue.

"We are simply asking the court to settle our disagreement, and we are confident the contract will be enforced," he added.

Nevertheless, Howard implied Samsung wants to stop making payments simply because it sells substantially more devices than it did three years ago and is presumably unhappy that its royalty obligations grew alongside its market share. "Samsung predicted it would be successful, but no one imagined their Android smartphone sales would increase this much," Howard wrote.

He also dismissed Samsung's claim that Microsoft breached its contract. He said Samsung used Microsoft's acquisition of Nokia's device business as an "excuse," adding, "Curiously, Samsung did not ask the court to decide whether the Nokia acquisition invalidated its contract with Microsoft, likely because it knew its position was meritless."

As is typical in the secretive world of patent agreements, many of the dispute's particulars remain unknown. Microsoft's lawsuit includes many redacted passages, for example, and does not make clear how much money it believes Samsung owes. Microsoft is believed to earn billions of dollars per year from its licensing agreements with Android device makers. Though Howard waved off Samsung's breach-of-contract claims, Microsoft is no doubt mindful that a negative ruling could establish a precedent that would allow other Android device makers to challenge these agreements.

Cyber criminals wielding APTs have plenty of innovative techniques to evade network and endpoint defenses. It's scary stuff, and ignorance is definitely not bliss. How to fight back? Think security that's distributed, stratified, and adaptive. Get the Advanced Attacks Demand New Defenses report today. (Free registration required.)

Michael Endler joined InformationWeek as an associate editor in 2012. He previously worked in talent representation in the entertainment industry, as a freelance copywriter and photojournalist, and as a teacher. Michael earned a BA in English from Stanford University in 2005 ... View Full Bio

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Lorna Garey
50%
50%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Author
8/4/2014 | 3:50:36 PM
Win win
So Microsoft wins either way, whether Windows takes off as a moble platform or Android stays in the lead -- just so long as it's not iOS!
Michael Endler
IW Pick
100%
0%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
8/4/2014 | 4:06:34 PM
Re: Win win
And with Office on iPads now, Microsoft is making a decent chunk of change on iOS too. It's rather nifty, for a company so woefully behind in mobile, to have engineered from its competitors one proven multi-billion dollar revenue stream, and another likely one.
Thomas Claburn
0%
100%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
8/4/2014 | 7:24:35 PM
Re: Win win
Sounds like Microsoft can just sit back and rest on its royalties and licensing fees. Oh, wait, that's sort of how we got here.
Lorna Garey
50%
50%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Author
8/5/2014 | 8:47:18 AM
Re: Win win
I guess if you can't beat 'em, make some money from 'em. Seriously though, why not do both -- try and get your own market share, while meanwhile grabbing what you can from competitors. 
Lorna Garey
50%
50%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Author
8/6/2014 | 9:20:31 AM
Re: Win win
@SaneIT - Gotta give the lawyers something to do all day I guess. 
InformationWeek Is Getting an Upgrade!

Find out more about our plans to improve the look, functionality, and performance of the InformationWeek site in the coming months.

Slideshows
10 Things Your Artificial Intelligence Initiative Needs to Succeed
Lisa Morgan, Freelance Writer,  4/20/2021
News
Tech Spending Climbs as Digital Business Initiatives Grow
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  4/22/2021
Commentary
Optimizing the CIO and CFO Relationship
Mary E. Shacklett, Technology commentator and President of Transworld Data,  4/13/2021
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
Planning Your Digital Transformation Roadmap
Download this report to learn about the latest technologies and best practices or ensuring a successful transition from outdated business transformation tactics.
Slideshows
Flash Poll