Sounds like a import ban is getting more and more unlikely.

Considering they're both infringing on each others products it's time for them to sit down and make a fair deal that's beneficial for them both.

Or for patent law to be reformed so it's possible to make a smartphone, tablet or console without infringing on defensive, vague patents made by the established players. Go and look at the specific patents being asserted, they're trivial inventions or legally unpatentable ideas.

That would off course be the best thing that could happen. For both consumers, and smaller companies who actually want to make inovative and quality products without having to worry about someone suddenly demanding 100's of million of dollars from them because they put a patent on something vaque and trivial.

Sony backing motorola confirmed!

Does it make a difference if we're talking about smaller companies vs the established, or the established vs a smaller company?

Both yes and no, in theory it doesn't make any sense whether a small company or a big established one should pay such fees, but at the end of the day companies like Motorola, Microsft, Apple, Samsung, Sony and so on and so forth can actually pay such fees (In most cases), which is why I didn't specify them before.

The infringement is not quite equal, as the patents asserted by Motorola are standard-essential while Microsoft's patents are not. The difference is that Motorola has promised to license its patents at a fair rate, while Microsoft has made no promise to license its own patents at all.

If Motorola manages to use these patents to secure a favourable deal, it threatens standards everywhere. Companies will be reluctant to adopt standards if adopting them provides no protection from the patents they're composed of. The best thing for standards is if Motorola gets the FRAND terms they promised to provide their patents under (2.25% of the finished product is absurd. Imagine the cost to license an airliner with an in-flight movie system!), and Microsoft gets whatever terms it wants for its own patents.

How could they possibly be "legally unpatentable" if they've A) been granted a patent by the US patent office and B) been tested in a court of law and upheld?

Well an Import ban was always unlikely, the ITC has never passed down a ban, it is just custom for the judge to hand the ruling down. They usually hand down an enforced payment settlement.

I fully agree with you that the patents aren't equal, which is why I said "fair deal", if Motorola ends up winning and Microsoft has to pay the 2.25% it could cause a big problem.

But realistically, I don't see any way that a Judge is actually going to agree with Motorola that that is the amount Microsoft should pay.