[Expeck]

Not really. Other companies are importing CDMA phones and are not banned by Samsung, because they paid licence for using patent. Apple and Samsung did a short negotiation about fees. Samsung asked 2.5% of cost of phone, Apple came back with 1$ or less. For time after that Samsung tried to talk with Apple about a fair deal,but Apple would always go back to 1$ or less price tag.

[josho]

You seem to have researched this, do you have a sense of what is the industry norm for licensing costs for these, or similar, CDMA patents?

[belorn]

I can only repeat what others has said here on HN. The industry norm is for bilateral patent agreements, which both parties share their FRAND patents and only pay the difference in licensing fees. Apple do not have FRAND patents to trade with, nor do they want to use substitute any other patents in a trade.

Thus in a rather exceptional case, Samsung/Google is asking the full price, and Apple is refusing it.

[hga]

Hmmm, Apple may not have hard FRAND patents, but they did have patents Samsung was interested in cross licensing in return for FRAND patent licenses. Seeing as how Apple is using various of those to club Samsung with (perhaps after Samsung first approached them), I can see why they didn't want to do such a deal, but....

I suppose we'll see how this all plays out in court, with this ITC fast track import ban nixed.

[ksec]

As a General Reminder, those so called Infringed Patents ( Whether they are FRAND or not ) are being sold to Apple as an Finished Product.