????針對谷歌致信美國電氣與電子工程師學會（IEEE）一事，科技新聞網站Techmeme的報道繞了一個大圈子。IEEE是一家非盈利組織，負責為各種電子、電氣技術制定標準，其對象從交直流電轉換器到Wi-Fi網絡無所不包。

????凡IEEE成員在提交專利技術、以期被IEEE確立為行業標準時，均需承諾遵守蘋果（Apple）和微軟（Microsoft）倡導的“公平、合理、非歧視”（FRAND）許可條款。Techmeme起初的報道曾經對谷歌響應蘋果和微軟的號召表示贊許。

????直到專利事務博客網站“自由與開源軟件專利”（FOSS Patents）的弗羅里恩?穆勒看到該信的原文，并且留意到了表達真實意圖的第三段，相關報道才開始轉換了基調。谷歌在第三段中借“不可撤回”一詞表示，它準備在收購摩托羅拉（Motorola）及其1.7萬個專利后，延續摩托羅拉的做法，從每部iPhone的銷售額中，“每部手機最多收取2.25%的版稅”。

????一直以來，蘋果在歐洲各法庭曾多次抗議，指責摩托羅拉的要求不公平、不合理、而且充滿歧視。

????穆勒贊同這種看法。他寫道：“從產品總銷售額中提取2.25%的版稅不僅完全與‘公平、合理、非歧視’的理念背道而馳，而且也違反了行業實踐。”

????在外人看來，也許2.25%的版稅看似并不多，但我們不妨看看如下統計數字：歐洲電信標準協會（European Telecommunications Standards Institute）旗下的在線數據庫共列入了4,956條技術標準，總計涵蓋了由175家公司提交的117,964條專利。如果每當有競爭對手試圖開發一款兼容設備時，這些公司都要求對方支付2.25%的版稅，那整個電信行業勢必將陷入癱瘓狀態。

????如今，我們只能想象一下已故的史蒂夫?喬布斯對谷歌的這一最新策略會作何感想。他在世時認為，谷歌為開發安卓系統（Android）而從蘋果“剽竊”（喬的原話）的專有技術屬于原創性作品，而且蘋果也并未要求將此技術樹為行業標準。現在，谷歌把蘋果使用所謂的基礎專利開發iPhone與當初谷歌使用蘋果的專利技術開發安卓相提并論，并欲借此收費，這種行徑實乃對厚顏無恥一詞的最新演繹。因為這些專利中至少有一項可以回溯到尋呼機時代，而且彼時摩托羅拉曾莊嚴承諾，要與所有行業同仁公平分享這些專利。

????It took a Techmeme news cycle for the import of Google's (GOOG) letter to the IEEE -- the nonprofit organization that sets technical standards for everything from AC/DC converters to Wi-Fi networks -- to sink in.

????Early reports praised the company for joining Apple (AAPL) and Microsoft (MSFT) in their calls for adherence to the "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" licensing terms that IEEE members promise to honor when they submit their patented technology for consideration as an industry standard.

????It wasn't until FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller got his hands on the text and spotted the telling third paragraph that the tone of the news coverage changed. The paragraph states, in language it describes as "irrevocable," that when Google is through buying Motorola (MOT) and its 17,000 patents, it is prepared to ask for the same "maximum per-unit royalty of 2.25%" that Motorola is demanding of Apple for every iPhone sale

????Apple has complained in European courts that Motorola's demand is unfair, unreasonable and totally discriminatory.

????Mueller agrees. "2.25% of the selling price of the product as a whole," he wrote, "is absolutely out of step with the concept of FRAND and with industry practice."

????To outsiders, 2.25% may not seem like a lot, but consider this: The online database maintained by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute lists 4,956 standards covering 117,964 patents filed by 175 companies. If each of them demanded 2.25% every time a competitor tried to build a compatible device, the industry would grind to a halt.

????One can only imagine what Steve Jobs would say to Google's latest gambit. The proprietary technology he felt Google had "stolen" (his word) from Apple to build Android was original work, and not something Apple had asked to be made an industry standard. To try to create an equivalence with so-called essential patents -- at least one of which dates back to the age of the pager -- that Motorola promised at the time to share fairly with all comers may be the modern definition of chutzpah.