Actually, it's along the lines of "you can take photos in public places, except for some places which we won't tell you about, and if we think you're up to no good" - guidance here. But the courts and MPs have been eroding this power over the last couple of years such that the savvy journo should be able to argue rings around any jobsworth copper trying to lean on them for taking photos.

From 1993
Or from 1988

So when Motorola/Samsung/Nokia/... each spend $Millions researching stuff to stick in the aforementioned patents, under the understanding that they can all cross-license at a reasonable cost (i.e. share the pool, probably at an overall expense of near $0), it is unreasonable to then charge more to a new entrant who has contributed nothing to the standards (and who has more cash than the US govmt)?

Scratch that, Symbol went to Motorola Solutions...

err - IIRC all (or a significant portion) of Motorola Mobility manufacturing is in China...

Motorola Mobility owns all the patents that Motorola owned. Motorola Solutions has sweet FA except for that which it filed post-separation, which is sweet FA as there was no budget for that.

There ain't no such thing as Motorola anymore, as Motorola Inc split into Motorola Solutions (Networks) and Motorola Mobility (Handsets + set top boxes) - affectionately known as Motorola Solutions (making a small profit) and Motorola Problems (not quite making profit). As part of the deal, all of the IPR owned by Motorola Inc was transferred to Motorola Mobility to give it a revenue stream (and, I suppose, to make it more attractive on the auction block) and Motorola Solutions got a license to use what it wanted at the time of the split. Since then, Solutions has split into two, with the (3GPP and 3GPP2) mobile networks technology bit getting bought by Nokia Siemens Networks, leaving the TETRA/Govmt and iDEN businesses in the Motorola Solutions stable.

"Motorola" as a brand is now thoroughly axed to death. I can't imagine that the brand will last long on consumer devices when under the Google umbrella, and the enterprise devices are either dying a slow/quick death (3GPP, 3GPP2 being replaced with NSN kit & iDEN cos it's a dying proprietary tech) or being outsourced to another well known brand (TETRA is relying on Ericsson for it's LTE enhancements, IIRC).

Motorola Mobility contains all consumer devices, plus Symbol, plus set top boxes (which also run Android) and cable modems.

Update: Google buying Motorola Mobility (handsets) for $40/share (a markup of 63% on last weeks closing price). Interesting move, but they acquire all of the old Motorola's IPR in the deal, so conceivably get a chunk of ammunition for these Android law suits.

They may be the oldest, but their market share for handsets has slipped down to the low single digits (this mirrors the picture in their network infrastructure business, which is now owned by NSN after being spun off as a separate business last year, but all the IPR stayed with the handset division). Yes, they do have a patent "war chest", but the investment in it has shrunk considerably over the last decade at least, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually a "war jewellery box". There might be a few gems in there, but most of the killer patents will have expired or are soon to expire so their negotiating position might be somewhat weak.

hmm Perhaps the hammer is aimed quite well at the nail with this post.... Although I can't see an exit from Android for Motorola quite yet.

FTFY. The GSM specs have been evolving over the last 20 years, and continue to do so as it enters the last maybe ten or so years of usefulness (and even that's a figure in doubt as the GSM network coverage is so ubiquitous - handset churn rate helps this along, though). GPRS and EDGE and enhancements to the specs, and even UMTS (incl HSPA) and LTE reuse & improve on some aspects of GSM. Patents are still being sought on GSM tech, and the spec still has changes being made by manufacturers and operators - especially when they have a patent on the change proposal

You might possibly be able to make a handset that technically does GSM without infringing on a patent, but it would be rather feature-light (if functioning at all, with modern network infrastructure).