精品国产_亚洲人成在线高清,国产精品成人久久久久,国语自产偷拍精品视频偷拍

????針對(duì)谷歌致信美國電氣與電子工程師學(xué)會(huì)（IEEE）一事，科技新聞網(wǎng)站Techmeme的報(bào)道繞了一個(gè)大圈子。IEEE是一家非盈利組織，負(fù)責(zé)為各種電子、電氣技術(shù)制定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，其對(duì)象從交直流電轉(zhuǎn)換器到Wi-Fi網(wǎng)絡(luò)無所不包。

????凡IEEE成員在提交專利技術(shù)、以期被IEEE確立為行業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)時(shí)，均需承諾遵守蘋果（Apple）和微軟（Microsoft）倡導(dǎo)的“公平、合理、非歧視”（FRAND）許可條款。Techmeme起初的報(bào)道曾經(jīng)對(duì)谷歌響應(yīng)蘋果和微軟的號(hào)召表示贊許。

????直到專利事務(wù)博客網(wǎng)站“自由與開源軟件專利”（FOSS Patents）的弗羅里恩?穆勒看到該信的原文，并且留意到了表達(dá)真實(shí)意圖的第三段，相關(guān)報(bào)道才開始轉(zhuǎn)換了基調(diào)。谷歌在第三段中借“不可撤回”一詞表示，它準(zhǔn)備在收購摩托羅拉（Motorola）及其1.7萬個(gè)專利后，延續(xù)摩托羅拉的做法，從每部iPhone的銷售額中，“每部手機(jī)最多收取2.25%的版稅”。

????一直以來，蘋果在歐洲各法庭曾多次抗議，指責(zé)摩托羅拉的要求不公平、不合理、而且充滿歧視。

????穆勒贊同這種看法。他寫道：“從產(chǎn)品總銷售額中提取2.25%的版稅不僅完全與‘公平、合理、非歧視’的理念背道而馳，而且也違反了行業(yè)實(shí)踐。”

????在外人看來，也許2.25%的版稅看似并不多，但我們不妨看看如下統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字：歐洲電信標(biāo)準(zhǔn)協(xié)會(huì)（European Telecommunications Standards Institute）旗下的在線數(shù)據(jù)庫共列入了4,956條技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，總計(jì)涵蓋了由175家公司提交的117,964條專利。如果每當(dāng)有競爭對(duì)手試圖開發(fā)一款兼容設(shè)備時(shí)，這些公司都要求對(duì)方支付2.25%的版稅，那整個(gè)電信行業(yè)勢必將陷入癱瘓狀態(tài)。

????如今，我們只能想象一下已故的史蒂夫?喬布斯對(duì)谷歌的這一最新策略會(huì)作何感想。他在世時(shí)認(rèn)為，谷歌為開發(fā)安卓系統(tǒng)（Android）而從蘋果“剽竊”（喬的原話）的專有技術(shù)屬于原創(chuàng)性作品，而且蘋果也并未要求將此技術(shù)樹為行業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。現(xiàn)在，谷歌把蘋果使用所謂的基礎(chǔ)專利開發(fā)iPhone與當(dāng)初谷歌使用蘋果的專利技術(shù)開發(fā)安卓相提并論，并欲借此收費(fèi)，這種行徑實(shí)乃對(duì)厚顏無恥一詞的最新演繹。因?yàn)檫@些專利中至少有一項(xiàng)可以回溯到尋呼機(jī)時(shí)代，而且彼時(shí)摩托羅拉曾莊嚴(yán)承諾，要與所有行業(yè)同仁公平分享這些專利。

????It took a Techmeme news cycle for the import of Google's (GOOG) letter to the IEEE -- the nonprofit organization that sets technical standards for everything from AC/DC converters to Wi-Fi networks -- to sink in.

????Early reports praised the company for joining Apple (AAPL) and Microsoft (MSFT) in their calls for adherence to the "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" licensing terms that IEEE members promise to honor when they submit their patented technology for consideration as an industry standard.

????It wasn't until FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller got his hands on the text and spotted the telling third paragraph that the tone of the news coverage changed. The paragraph states, in language it describes as "irrevocable," that when Google is through buying Motorola (MOT) and its 17,000 patents, it is prepared to ask for the same "maximum per-unit royalty of 2.25%" that Motorola is demanding of Apple for every iPhone sale

????Apple has complained in European courts that Motorola's demand is unfair, unreasonable and totally discriminatory.

????Mueller agrees. "2.25% of the selling price of the product as a whole," he wrote, "is absolutely out of step with the concept of FRAND and with industry practice."

????To outsiders, 2.25% may not seem like a lot, but consider this: The online database maintained by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute lists 4,956 standards covering 117,964 patents filed by 175 companies. If each of them demanded 2.25% every time a competitor tried to build a compatible device, the industry would grind to a halt.

????One can only imagine what Steve Jobs would say to Google's latest gambit. The proprietary technology he felt Google had "stolen" (his word) from Apple to build Android was original work, and not something Apple had asked to be made an industry standard. To try to create an equivalence with so-called essential patents -- at least one of which dates back to the age of the pager -- that Motorola promised at the time to share fairly with all comers may be the modern definition of chutzpah.