With the "unanimous" approval of both boards, Google has agreed to hand over $40 per share to acquire Motorola Mobility--the spun-off phone-making wing of the original Motorola, separate from its government and enterprise business. The price is a big premium on Motorola's last closing share price, and amounts to some $12.5 billion. That's about a third of Google's cash reserves, as per the most recent figures, which demonstrates exactly how gigantic a move this is. But exactly why is Google pulling this trick off? 
 
 Hardware-software synergy 
 
 The most obvious interpretation of the deal is that Motorola is already an internationally renowned expert in something Google is painfully naive about: manufacturing hardware in massive numbers. Motorola brought the world many of its important mobile phones over the last several decades, and the famous Razr device was so unusual and radical in design that it sold over 130 million units. While Motorola's fortunes then took a dive, it took a bold move and launched itself into the Android smartphone market--making the Droid line of smartphones that saw broad market approval. 
 
 Now Google gets access to Motorola's design and engineering process, and this will allow it to carefully tailor both future smartphone hardware and its own Android OS software together. Don't mistake this for another Nexus One, which came from external manufacturers. 
 
 Making phones in-house means a Google Droid phone will likely have better battery life, slicker performance, greater reliability, and fewer bugs, which is exactly what Google needs to rival Apple, with its iron-fist control over seamless integration of software into custom-crafted hardware. 
 
 And because Motorola is already so huge, and long-established, it has extensive and very strong links to manufacturing partners around the world. Those relationships are now owned by Google, which means it can hone and refine them to meet future Android phone (and tablet?) needs. 
 
 Google is in the hardware business. 
 
 Patents 
 
 Here's a gem in the Google blog post: 
 
 We recently explained how companies including Microsoft and Apple are banding together in anti-competitive patent attacks on Android. The U.S. Department of Justice had to intervene in the results of one recent patent auction to "protect competition and innovation in the open source software community" and it is currently looking into the results of the Nortel auction. Our acquisition of Motorola will increase competition by strengthening Google's patent portfolio, which will enable us to better protect Android from anti-competitive threats from Microsoft, Apple and other companies. 
 
 This transaction, as much as it is about getting some really, really slick Android hardware out on sale, is also about protecting Android from IP battles. 
 
 The ongoing and devisive legal battles around the world concerning theft of Apple IP by Samsung (on its Android-powered smartphones and tablets) and other Android device makers are numerous and complex: Apple even succeeded in barring sales of Samsung's flagship Android tablet PC the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, on the understanding that the design, elements of the UI and even the packaging are clones of Apple's own efforts. It's widely thought that Apple sees these numerous suits as a way of indirectly tackling the way Android gently emulates some of iOS's functionality. 
 
 Android also closely mimics Microsoft IP, and in a similar move to Apple, Microsoft has been indirectly snipping away at the problem by targeting different Android device makers--generating more income in licensing fees than its own Windows-powered smartphone business makes. Motorola itself had very recently hinted it may attempt collecting royalties on Android sales, which would further damage the device's credibility (by potentially bumping up the handset's prices across the board). 
 
 With the recent billion-dollar purchase of Nortel's extensive patent cache, many of which may be applicable to the smartphone and tablet computing world, Apple and a group of similar companies sparked off a war of words, centered on IP, with Google. Google alleges the deal is a murky attempt at killing its business, but its own bids--which were multiples of scientific numbers like Pi--didn't seem serious. By grabbing Motorola, Google's certainly gained access to more patents to shore up its Android patent portfolio and thus enable it to counter (and respond with counter suits) any future IP threats. 
 
 Where this leaves other Android phone makers 
 
 This is a very difficult question, and one that casts a long-enough and deep-enough shadow that Google felt it necessary to mention several times in the press release. Motorola will be run as a "separate business," and it will remain a "licensee of Android," maintaining a slight separation from Google proper, and suggesting the Motorola brand won't be going away. Though we expect that Motorola smartphones may quickly become the slickest, best-performing Android units, Google's careful to note "Android will remain open" and the partnership will make "amazing user experiences that supercharge the entire Android ecosystem." Also, Google's mobile boss Andy Rubin is quoted saying the overall Android vision is "unchanged" and Google's strongly committed to keeping it "an open platform" with a "vibrant open source community" thanks to "all our valued Android partners." 
 
 Google is sensitive that other makers like HTC and Samsung will be very nervous about the new deal, so its promising that Android will remain as it is--a very accessible and "open" platform for other makers to build great devices upon. But does this actually ring true? If Motorola's future Android phones acutally do benefit from enhanced hardware-software integration, then they may out-class the competition (particularly if Motorola helps with Google's sometimes sticky interpretation of the core Android user interface) ... and that could steal market share from Google's own partners. It's going to be a tricky path to walk. 
 
 The fallout for HP/Palm, Nokia 
 
 Competitor smartphone platforms will be worried, for sure. Android was already a hugely powerful competitor and has snipped up over half the new touchscreen smartphone market (and about 20% of the tablet market), leaving little space for Palm or Microsoft. Microsoft has big hopes for the future of its Windows Phone 7 software, particularly thanks to its hardware-software partnership with Nokia, and HP has great hopes for the future of its Pre phones and TouchPad tablets which are the result of a software-hardware synergy created when it bought Palm. 
 
 Google, however, may have seriously dented these ambitions. By buying Motorola, it's positioned itself to concrete its hold over the smartphone game, and possibly deliver even better hardware to market. Apple's iPhone platform isn't going anywhere either, and it's even predicting bigger sales of its future iPhone offerings than had originally been predicted for 2011. Between these two giants, HP/Palm, Nokia/Microsoft and others may see little space to maneuver. 
 
 Update: Google just completed a webcast press interview about the news, and kept very closely to the lines that've been presented in both the press release and the company's own blog post. It's all about bringing Motorola's expertise into the fold, Motorola will remain as a separate company, and Google values its other Android partners. In fact, the company spoke to the top five licensees, and secured "enthusiastic support," by which we can assume Google allayed their fears. One way they may be planning to do this is by having a bidding program for the flagship Nexus line of Google-branded Android phones, which is still open to other companies (as well as Motorola)--HTC and Samsung have been previous partners here. 
 
 There's also an intriguing hint about Motorola's "IP set-top boxes," or Net TV devices. Google has so far failed to dent this market, despite trying hard, but sees "great convergence" between mobile and set-top box content, and plans to "accelerate" this process. A big hint that Google may try a different, Apple TV-style attempt to get into the game. 
 
 [Image: Flickr user don solo] 
 
 Chat about this news with Kit Eaton on Twitter and Fast Company too. ||||| Apple says Korean company must pay $40 per device for 'systematically' copying features to use on its newest devices 
 
 The smartphone world's fiercest rivalry is heading back to court again this week in the heart of the Silicon Valley, as Apple and Samsung begin a new trial - accusing each other, once again, of ripping off designs and features. 
 
 The trial will mark the latest round in a long-running series of lawsuits between the two tech giants that underscore a much larger concern about what is allowed to be patented. 
 
 
 
 Like the previous trial, held in summer 2012, the new one will be overseen by Judge Lucy Koh in the California district court in San Jose. Samsung is appealing against that verdict, where a jury found in Apple's favour on every count, though reducing its damages claim. 
 
 In the new trial Apple is seeking damages of $2bn, claiming infringement of five patents by Samsung devices sold in the US between 2010 and 2012, including Galaxy smartphones and tablets. Samsung is claiming infringement of two of its patents by the iPhone and iPad. Jury selection begins on Monday relating to data transmission and the use of video, audio and photos. 
 
 "There's a widespread suspicion that lots of the kinds of software patents at issue are written in ways that cover more ground than what Apple or any other tech firm actually invented," Notre Dame law professor Mark McKenna said. "Overly broad patents allow companies to block competition." 
 
 If Apple is successful, it could bring similar lawsuits against other Android handset makers, because the patents at issue are part of Google's Android software, rather than being particular to Samsung's TouchWiz software. Apple cannot sue Google directly because it is only when the Android code is implemented in hardware that infringement arises. 
 
 However the slow pace of lawsuits has raised the question of how effective such lawsuits are. Apple began the lawsuits when Steve Jobs expressed frustration at what he saw as "copying" by Android of iPhone features, and vowed to go "thermonuclear" in his attempts to stamp them out. But Apple has had very few concrete successes in courts, despite a number of successful cases, with Google's software now powering about a billion devices worldwide. 
 
 Apple filed the suit against the South Korean consumer electronics behemoth in February 2012 in what Koh called "one action in a worldwide constellation of litigation between the two companies". 
 
 The latest Apple-Samsung case will be tried less than two years after a federal jury found the South Korean firm was infringing on Apple patents. Samsung was ordered to pay $929m but has been allowed to continue selling products using the technology after Judge Koh denied Apple a sales injunction pending appeal. Koh ruled then that there was no clear evidence that the specific patents which Samsung had been found to infringe actually drove sales. 
 
 "Apple revolutionized the market in personal computing devices," Apple attorneys wrote in court filings. "Samsung, in contrast, has systematically copied Apple's innovative technology and products, features and designs, and has deluged markets with infringing devices." 
 
 Samsung countered that it has broken technological barriers with its own ultra-slim, lightweight phones. 
 
 "Samsung has been a pioneer in the mobile device business sector since the inception of the mobile device industry," Samsung attorneys wrote. "Apple has copied many of Samsung's innovations in its Apple iPhone, iPod, and iPad products." 
 
 In the upcoming case, Apple claims Samsung took a tap-from-search technology that allows someone searching for a telephone number or address on the web to tap on the results to call the number or put the address into a map. It also points to a Google Quick Search Box in the Android-powered Galaxy Nexus steals from patented technology used by virtual assistant Siri to answer queries in the iPhone. It also claims patents on autocorrection when words are typed. In addition, Apple says Samsung copied "Slide to Unlock," which allows users to swipe the face of their smartphone to use it. 
 
 Last week an Apple engineer who worked on the original iPhone told the Wall Street Journal about the intense pressure from Steve Jobs to come up with the company's first smartphone model - and how the team devised the slide-to-unlock feature. But Samsung is expected to counter that the idea had already been implemented by other companies on phones, which could render it invalid, depending on when Apple's patent was filed. 
 
 Samsung countered that Apple is stealing a wireless technology system that speeds up sending and receiving data. 
 
 The most attention-grabbing claim in the case is Apple's demand that Samsung pay a $40 royalty for each Samsung device running software allegedly conceived by Apple, more than five times more than the amount sought in the previous trial and well above other precedents between smartphone companies. 
 
 Each side has 25 hours of court time to put their case and rebut the other side's. 
 
 If Apple prevails, the costs to Samsung could reach $2 billion. Apple's costs, if it lost, are expected to be about $6 million. 
 
 "You rarely get from the jury what you ask for, so companies aim high," German patent analyst Florian Müller said. "But in my opinion this is so far above a reasonable level the judge should not have allowed it." However the owner of a patent is under no obligation to license it at any price, unless it is part of a "standards-essential patent" (SEP) class - used in standards such as Wi-Fi or the video encoding system H.264 - in which case licensing at a "fair and reasonable" is obligatory. Neither side has any standards-essential patents at issue in the trial. 
 
 The problem, Müller said, is that each smartphone has thousands of patented ideas in it; Apple is challenging just five. Equally, a high proportion of those patents are SEPs, which are typically licensed for fractions of a penny per device. 
 
 Throughout the three years of litigation, Samsung's market share has grown. One of every three smartphones sold worldwide last year was a Samsung, now the market leader. Apple, with a typically higher price, was second, with about 15% of the global market. In the US, Samsung is now the provider of about a quarter of all smartphones in use, against 40% for Apple - making Samsung the second-largest smartphone maker there. 
 
 Apple claims the following Samsung products now infringe on Apple patents: Admire, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Note, Galaxy Note II, Galaxy SII, Galaxy SII Epic 4G Touch, Galaxy SII Skyrocket, Galaxy SIII, Galaxy Tab II 10.1, and Stratosphere. 
 
 Samsung claims the following Apple products infringe on Samsung patents: iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPad 2, iPad 3, iPad 4, iPad mini, iPod touch (5th generation), iPod touch (4th generation), and MacBook Pro. 
 
 With the San Jose federal courtroom just a 15-minute drive from Apple's Cupertino headquarters, even jury selection can be difficult. In the previous case, several prospective jurors were dismissed because of their ties to the company. 
 
 • No, Samsung didn't pay Apple its fine in nickels ||||| Apple's ridiculous patent assault against Samsung finally hits Google, which suddenly looks genius for choosing Asus to manufacture the Nexus 7 tablet. On Friday, US District Judge Lucy Koh issued a preliminary injunction against Galaxy Nexus, which is Google's flagship, stock Android smartphone. Days earlier she barred Galaxy Tab 10.1. For the preliminary injunction to go into effect, Apple must first put up $96 million. 
 
 What timing. To preview Android 4.1 Jellybean, the company gave one to each of more than 5,000 developers during Google I/O earlier this week. The new OS releases to Motorola XOOM tablets and Galaxy Nexus in mid-July, making the smartphone the first to get the important upgrade. The preliminary injunction would somewhat stymie Jellybean distribution ahead of iO6, which Apple is months from releasing. New features include voice response, that in BetaNews testing smoke Apple's Siri. If you're thinking about buying Galaxy Nexus, don't wait! 
 
 The injunction hinges on rather vague US Patent no. 8,086,604 -- a "universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system”. From the patent: 
 
 The present invention provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different techniques. Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information. 
 
 Apple looks desperate from the looks of things, as it wants to restrict sales of old products. While Galaxy Nexus will initially be the main device for Jellybean, it's not considered a top-seller and Google and Samsung jointly launched the phone in October. In the United States, Sprint and Verizon sell the LTE model locked and subsidized, while Google offers the HSPA+ Galaxy Nexus unlocked. 
 
 Judge Koh granted the injunction, accepting Apple claims of irreparable harm because of "long-term loss of market share". These words speak for themselves in this case. Apple claims that the Galaxy Nexus has dented their market share, which is really laughable, considering Samsung Galaxy S II is by measure of many millions the bigger seller. The lawyers must be pleased with their finding, as it took them 7 months to find it. Maybe they're laughing, too, at their snookering the judge. 
 
 The fact that Apple is going for products that don’t have much market time left in them also speaks volumes about the philosophy of CEO Tim Cook. On one hand, during last quarter's earnings conference call, he claims that he doesn’t like to go to court; but, on the other hand, he sues a competitor to get an injunction for a 7-month old product, which is close to its end-of-life. Apple got the preliminary injunction after failing to bar Samsung Galaxy S III and gaining temporary ban against HTC One X. 
 
 That Samsung has done so poorly in the courts might be one explanation Google chose Asus for the Nexus 7 tablet. Samsung is Apple's largest competitor and, and as such, takes the most legal attacks -- all while iPhone and iOS fall behind Android. 
 
 Apple's patent lawsuits can only hurt their public image and align people against them. Earlier this month my colleague Joe Wilcox boycotted Apple for being a "patent bully". 
 
 Apple’s behavior looks more like continuation of late-Steve Jobs personal vendetta against all Android phone manufacturers basically and it’s an appalling way to gain temporary increase in market share. The only ones affected are, as always, the fans of Google/Samsung that want to buy the Galaxy Nexus. 
 
 Apple is subtly telling the world that it doesn’t matter what anyone wants and that they’ve got the resources to find any possible reason to stop them from getting what they want. And they’re doing a great job at it, too.
– Only hours after Motorola rolled out its new Razr, Samsung and Google unveiled a new Android smartphone of their own. The high-end Galaxy Nexus—which is set to retail for more than $700—would have launched more than a week ago, but the companies decided to reschedule after the death of Steve Jobs, the Wall Street Journal reports. The phone runs Android's new Ice Cream Sandwich platform, designed to run on both smartphones and tablets. "We're targeting the premium segment of the mobile handset market with this handset," says a Samsung exec. New features in the latest version of Android include facial recognition software that allows a user to use his face to unlock his phone, although when demonstrated onstage at the Galaxy Nexus launch, the phone failed to recognize its owner, PC World notes. Google says the new phone—which analysts believe will help Samsung in its quest to overtake Apple—also has tighter integration with Google+, allowing users to have video chats with as many as nine contacts.