A fanboy asked me why buy a Nokia? And I said I don’t buy Brands, I buy Products, in this case an N900 (I’ve never ever had a Nokia handset before)

The iPhone is MADE IN CHINA! Well that’s a sign of Quality isn’t it…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_assets

I think your supposed BS in Accounting stands for you know what.

@Frank

Like I said, come back when you understand the meaning of Current Assets.

I think you might need to learn what CURRENT ASSETS mean. Current Asset is just what the company COULD POTENTIALLY convert into cash but it’s in no way CASH in the bank.

Oh and by the way, I have a BS in Accounting, a MS in ACCOUNTING and a CPA. Enjoy!

Jay

Like I said to Josh, come back when you understand what the term “Current Assets” means.

jay

I dont think that quite applies either, but that case and the Qualcomm case (where they were also found innocent of violating Qualcomm’s patents) are the only ones I knew of offhand directly involving Nokia and GSM-related patents. If Andrew has a directly relevant citation, I would like to see it, too.

Not directly relevant to the Apple/Nokia case, but can the KSR case be used to void pre-existing deals? I would think RIM would love to get a few dozen million back from NTP for patenting wireless email…

dont hate brah.

Like I said, steer clear of investing in individual stocks until you understand how a balance sheet works or what accountants/investors mean when they talk about “cash”.

Also, avoid commenting on things that you do not understand.

The link I provided listed Total Cash (mrq): 24.22B.

(MRTQ = Most Recent Quarter (mrq): 27-Jun-09

But I also stated that Yahoo Finance runs a few days behind, that the most recent quarter they have is still not up to date.

But as of 27 June they ALREADY had 24.22 Billion in CASH.

With the most recent quarter its gone up to 33 Billion.

These figures are plainly listed on that page, except the 34Billion number, but Google is your friend. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/20/apples-sauce-34-billion-in-cash-stock-peaks-and-mysterious-shipping-anomalies/

Sigh…

The link you provided actually was for a case where Nokia was found innocent of violating someone else’s patent. I don’t think that applies.

Your assessment of the probable scenario seems quite reasonable.

Apple may simply be relying on KSR vs Teleflex, (2007) where the Supreme court found that obvious applications of common concepts are not patentable, and putting wifi and 3G etc. all in a tiny box in your pocket is perfectly obvious and inevitable to anyone skilled in the trade. http://tinyurl.com/6je35n

It seems likely the others settled prior to that decision.

Just one other piece of advice: steer clear of investing in individual stocks until you learn how to read a balance sheet.

On September 26, 2009 Apple had $32.625 billion in Current Assets, otherwise known as liquid assets (cash, short term investments, inventory or other items that are easily converted into cash). In accounting and investing terms, Current Assets are the equivalent of cash on hand.

Likewise to references to patent trolling or squatting – does anyone actually think Nokia are not making use of these patented technologies themselves? Hellooo

I was merely posting the term that’s widely used to describe JohnO’s comment. I have no idea whether or not Nokia patent squats, and wasn’t claiming so. I don’t even follow that sort of stuff.

Let me change what I sai… I love my iPhone bcuz of apple of course bcuz if it wasn’t for apple it wuldnt be a iPhone but I love it waaaaaaaaaayyyyyy more bcuz of jailbreaking and being able to play NES, SNES. GBA etc… without jailbreaking I think the iPhone wuld be a little boring

Nokia claims to have licensed 40 manufacturers, including “all major” ones, so it is not out of the question to assume Broadcom and Infineon are on that list, especially since they also manufacture for Nokia. However, that list is not public, so it is impossible to say for sure.

Nokia won two large cases, against Qualcomm, and InterDigital, in the past 2 years. I do not know if InterDigital was a supplier/licensor to Apple, but this is likely the case Andrew refers to:

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091019-710028.html

@derloos Nokia has not been patent squatting, since they have actively been developing products that use this technology. I would also sincerely doubt Nokia has waiting to spring this on Apple; the courts take an exceptionally dim view of a company that licenses patents, but never contacts an alleged infringer. Most likely, the two companies have been in frequent contact about this issue, in some scenario like this:

1) Apple announces/develops GSM based phone 2) Nokia contacts Apple, saying we have patent XXXX, you need to license our technology like these other 40 companies to use this in your product. 3) Apple tells Nokia either “we do not believe your patent is valid/applies” or “take it up with our suppliers. 4-9) Apple and Nokia repeat steps 2 and 3 with degrees of escalation, culminating in a failure to reach a agreement or settlement. 10) Nokia files suit.

Reasonable people can (and should) argue as to the merits of this patent, and of the patent system in general, but Nokia is hardly a NTP-type patent troll, because they actually create and sell products based on the things they claim to develop.

Likewise to references to patent trolling or squatting – does anyone actually think Nokia are not making use of these patented technologies themselves?

You seem to have flunked out of Fanboy 101. Let me supply the clif notes:

Patent held by Apple:

Miraculous invention by a divine power, the work of absolute genius, and not to be encroached upon regardless of how obvious, or how much prior art exists.

Patent held by others:

Mere floor sweepings, used only to milk Apple’s profits, the work of trolls and patentwhores. All of them are invalid, or the workproduct of stolen apple secrets.

Nope. 35Billion. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=AAPL

The figures shown there have not been updated from yesterdays earnings call.

And Apple does not need to fund next year’s operations, since they make money every single day. The 35B is a war chest, plain and simple.

Likewise to references to patent trolling or squatting – does anyone actually think Nokia are not making use of these patented technologies themselves? Hellooo…

I tend to agree. I think in this instance Apple is an innocent third party of a drive by suing.

Apple has not invented anything in the GSM area. Nothing. Apple doesn’t even make its own chipsets.

Apple simply bought commercially available off the shelf parts from Infineon and Broadcom and put them in a box.

If one of those companies violated Nokia patents then those companies should hold Apple harmless, and pay any royalties on Apple’s behalf.

Apple went to the store and bought standard products in commercial chip-sets.

@Andrew:

the company they did license the tech from lost their patent case to Nokia.

[citation needed]

@JohnO:

Nokia, among many many others, are sucking up patents without building anything.

Surely you jest?! Nokia not make anything? Come on, you know better.

it is possible that Nokia has been in contact with apple about this, trying to reach an agreement which apple didn’t want to make. Nokia gets sick of waiting and sues.

“However, Nokia, among many many others, are sucking up patents without building anything.”

Patent Squatting.

As long as my iPhone 3G and 3G S keep working I’ll be happy