FTC revises final order over Google, Motorola Mobility business practices

FTC revises final order over Google, Motorola Mobility business practices

Summary: The FTC rules on Google's business practices once again, this time over the Internet giant's standing against other mobile device manufacturers.

SHARE:
google-ftc-eu-antitrust

Google's $12.5 billion acquisition of Motorola Mobility has been questioned more and more with each quarterly earnings report.

Many investors, analysts, and even consumers are still puzzled about what Google wants with the company at this point, perhaps beyond a sizable patent portfolio.

Some of Google's competitors (namely Microsoft) have been quite vocal about the potential damage here, with Redmond calling out Mountain View for potential "anti-competitive" business practices.

The Federal Trade Commission has chimed in again -- and possibly for the last time as the government agency has issued what it described as the "final order" over Google's business practices in relation to other mobile device manufacturers.

The federal department also specified that the edict published on Wednesday is actually a modified version of the previous settlement.

Here's a summary from the FTC:

The Final Order requires Google to abide by its commitments to license its standard-essential patents on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory or FRAND terms. These standard-essential patents are needed to make popular devices such as smart phones, laptop and tablet computers, and gaming consoles. The agency alleged that Google had reneged on these commitments and pursued – or threatened to pursue – injunctions and exclusion orders against companies that need to use standard-essential patents held by Google’s subsidiary, Motorola Mobility LLC (MMI), in their devices and were willing to license these patents on FRAND terms.

To read the entire FTC order, scroll through the document below:

FTC Final Order: Google, Motorola Mobility

Topics: Mobility, Google, Government US, Legal, Patents

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

6 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Google was Scroogled!

    It took the government to stop Google from becoming a patent troll.

    "If you can't innovate - litigate"
    William Farrel
    • Ah, he mantra of MS and Apple.

      It hasn't done anything to Google; they weren't a troll in the first place.

      I agree with you about the rest.
      jessepollard
      • They certainly are. That's why they lost the lawsuit

        and why this order came out. That's the US government telling them that their trolling with these grand patents has to stop. They can and will keep trolling with others but you can't do that with ones that were already put under grand terms.
        With this and the major brick Moto just laid with their hugely disappointing ho hum Droid reveal the deal has proven definitely way over valued
        Johnny Vegas
  • I don't believe you are biased per se, but you did neglect to mention...

    That this order REVERSES the total ban on injunctions for FRAND patents. This allows Google/Motorola from seeking INJUNCTIVE relief where the other party "...refuses to enter a License Agreement covering the FRAND Patent on terms that have been set in the Final Ruling of a Court or through Binding Arbitration"

    This means that Microsoft and Apple, who have been skirting around their FRAND commitments expecting no injunctions, may now have to negotiate with Google.

    This is actually a BIG win for Google. I find it odd that this salient point of the order was neglected.
    BanjoPaterson
    • Indeed. Groklaw has published an article on this subject.

      For more in-depth analysis:
      www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2013072414233398
      Zogg
  • Poor reporting - don't just publish the order, report on it

    I just tried to skim the order but couldn't find the actual order buried in declarations and definitions of terms and exhibit letters and so on... tl;dr. Your job is a reporter is to give a summary of impenetrable legal documents to save the rest of us an hour or so of our time deciphering them.

    What is it with all these lazy journalists these days? Punt out a non-article and paste info into it. You can do better.

    Thank you BanjoPaterson and Zogg for doing Rachel King's job for her. Now I know what this is about!
    james.faction