kowenicki said:
kanageddaamen said:
Even though I reject tha rgument that it "ceaces to function" and think your anaolgy is remarkably misguided (I would equate it to removing a trailer hitch from a truck. The truck can't tow anything any more but you can still use it to get from place to place.) Lets run with it.
You are arguing that this technology is INTEGRAL to the success of the product, that it cannot function without it. Motorola is asking 2.25% royalties for this absolutely essential function that would it be removed, make the product unusable. That is not unreasonable at all. Now I am not certain if this is retail or not, lets assume a nice round average of $350/console. That is $7.88 for each console. A pittance with what the video ability means from a profit standpoint for the 360
Lets look at a blu-ray player, which sony charges a $9.50 licesing free for regardless of price. This is nearly 20% of the cost of a $50 product. No one argues that is extortion.
Again, MS MUST pay for technology they use, and what Motorola is asking for is not unreasonable.
|
Sorry... who asks for the licensing fee??? I think you mean the blu-ray consortium.
The last reported license fee for a blu-ray layer was $4.50, that was 2 years ago... it will be even less now.
|
Naturally, which sony is part of, and since they are the only ones who are a direct player in the Video game market (This is VIDEO GAME chartz, is it not?) I though it fitting enough to just use them.
I must have old data then. Apologies, 10% of the price then.
