In recent months, Apple managed to remove from sale Samsung and HTC products, products that run the Android OS developed by Google. Because for the time being they cannot fight with Apple on all fronts, those from Google argue that Apple's technologies should become FRAND technologies, essential for the industry, and should be offered free of charge to all manufacturers. The technology for multitouch, Apple technologies regarding 3G communications and other extremely popular Apple technologies should be transformed into FRAND technologies, according to Google. The Mountain View company says that these technologies are so popular that anyone should have them for free, regardless of who developed them, the developers only being left with the bitter taste of the fact that their work is taken over for free by Google and other companies.
While collaborative [Standards Setting Organizations (SSOs)] play an important part in the overall standard setting system, and are particularly prominent in industries such as telecommunications, they are not the only source of standards. Indeed, many of the same interoperability benefits that the FTC and others have touted in the SSO context also occur when one firm publishes information about an otherwise proprietary standard and other firms then independently decide (whether by choice or of necessity) to make complementary investments to support that standard in their products. ... Because proprietary or de facto standards can have just as important effects on consumer welfare, the Committee's concern regarding the abuse of SEPs should encompass them as well.
Of course, an Apple lawyer, who advises management on intellectual property matters, claims that extremely popular technologies do not necessarily become standards, and the companies that develop them must have the right to protect them and make money from them. their trail. He claims that standardized technologies allow interoperability between mobile terminals, giving them the same basic functionality, and the rest of the technologies are developed to differentiate mobile terminals by functions. Of course, Apple technologies should not be transformed into essentials and the truth is that it would be incorrect for an Apple technology, initially implemented by the company to differentiate itself from others, to remain its own, as long as it is not necessary for interoperable functionality one or more smartphones.
The capabilities of an iPhone are categorically different from a conventional phone, and result from Apple's ability to bring its traditional innovation in computing to the mobile market. Using an iPhone to take photos, manage a home-finance spreadsheet, play video games, or run countless other applications has nothing to do with standardized protocols. Apple spent billions in research and development to create the iPhone, and third party software developers have spent billions more to develop applications that run on it. The price of an iPhone reflects the value of these nonstandard technologies — as well as the value of the aesthetic design of the iPhone, which also reflects immense study and development by Apple, and which is entirely unrelated to standards.
Of course, these disputes are not beneficial for users and will not have an acceptable finality for any of the parties, but no one can change anything.
