Not every Silicon Valley company with rich intellectual property bothers to defend it. Altruistic, perhaps, but it is also a recipe for an activist attack. UNPRotected IP is money on the table.
并非每家拥有丰富的知识产权的硅谷公司都会费神去捍卫它。大公无私?或许吧。但这么做也会招来维权股东的攻击。不受保护的知识产权就像摆在桌面上的钱。
Qualcomm, the mobile chipmaker, faced activist questions last year. Jana Partners argued that the company should consider spinning off its higher-margin licensing division. But the Jana idea, which was ultimately rejected, only came about because Qualcomm is already assertive, supplying the fruits of its research and development to other companies, and demanding fat royalties in return. Oracle, which last week lost a court battle with Google, also took an aggressive tack, accusing the search giant of violating its copyright to develop the Android operating system. Oracle’s defeat was applauded by software geeks prizing openness. But Oracle’s shareholders could have been $9bn better off.
移动芯片制造商高通(Qualcomm)去年就面临了维权股东的质询。大股东Jana Partners认为高通应考虑剥离其利润率较高的专利授权业务部门。但Jana提出这个主张(最终被否决了)只是因为高通已经相当咄咄逼人:向其他公司提供自己的研发成果,收取高额专利费用作为交换。上周打官司刚输给谷歌(Google)的甲骨文公司(Oracle)也采取了激进手段,指控搜索巨擘谷歌在开发安卓(Android)操作系统时侵犯其专利。甲骨文的败诉令看重开放性的软件爱好者们鼓掌称快。但甲骨文的股东们原来有望进账90亿美元。
【科技公司该不该捍卫知识产权】相关文章:
★ 中国哲学的起源
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15