American media: The losing of Millet India to international Chinese manufacturers sounded the alarm

Lead: The online edition of the US Business Week said that Millet's loss of patent lawsuits in India suggests that China's smartphone brands will face more risks and challenges in the future. The following is the full text of the article: a week ago, the Global Times praised Millet's excellent performance in circumventing patent lawsuits. In such an intellectual property litigation industry, the establishment of four years of millet in the success of China's three smart machine manufacturers and the world's top five experts in the process of machine manufacturers, has not encountered any patent litigation. Unfortunately, Millet just lost the first patent lawsuit, and is an important lawsuit. India may be the most important market for millet, but it is here that Swedish electronics maker Ericsson has accused Millet of violating its 8 patents. We launched a continuous research and development effort, but Millet did not pay a reasonable authorization fee to use our technology, which is unfair. Ericsson spokeswoman Goulaf Sharma (Gaurav Sharma) told Bloomberg. The Indian courts share that view. In a ruling announced yesterday, a judge at the Delhi High Court ruled that Ericsson had won the ban on the sale of millet handsets in the Indian market. The court demanded that the Indian customs stop the importation of all types of millet equipment due to the identification of millet infringement of Ericsson's patents. The ruling will be in force until the hearing next February. A millet spokeswoman told Bloomberg that the company could not comment because they had not yet received court orders. The lawsuit will give millet and other international ambitions of China's smartphone brand sounded the alarm. Daniel Gleeson, a senior analyst at the market research firm, said that Chinese brands such as Oppo and Danielgrissen would closely monitor the performance of millet in the case. Since patent licensing fees are usually less than 1% of the value of mobile phones, less-than-sales brands may not cause concern. However, the size of these companies is already big enough to spark the interest of major patent companies. Although Millet did not invest too much research and development costs, but has made great success in China, and began to expand the Indian market. According to Global Times, Millet has only 12 patents, far inferior to Huawei. Huawei invested about $5 billion trillion in research and development last year, with a total of more than 22,000 patents. For millet, saving research and development costs is no longer a desirable option. The Chinese government's monopoly investigation of Qualcomm has even hurt millet. Yi, secretary general of China Mobile Internet Association, told the Global Times that millet could benefit from a high pass to prohibit its U.S. customers from demanding licensing fees from other Qualcomm customers. Such deals have helped companies such as millet Save the cost of patents. But Yi added: "This is widely seen as a bad contract for companies that invest a lot of resources in the area of intellectual property." Millet and other Chinese brands will face more litigation risks in the future, and their business model could be hit. Ultimately, these brands must reach an agreement with the patent holders. This is important for these companies because they are in the low-end handset market. Grissom said. Among the main smartphone makers, he points out, only AppleAnd Samsung can continue to achieve more than 5% of the operating profit rate. For the Low-margin Chinese companies, the licensing fees, though not high, may be only 0.5% to 0.8%, but still have a huge impact on their profits. (PEI)