Motorola has scrapped its poison pill defence.

The question is whether this signals a change in the corporate governance landscape and whether the pills, part of a corporate defence strategy, are being made easier to digest.

You can read about the way poison pills work here.

Shareholders usually vote against poison pill provisions. For good reason. As anti-takeover mechanisms, they limit shareholder value by wiping out any takeover or control premium for the company. And every time a company tries putting in place poison pill provisions without putting it to a vote of shareholders, they are effectively screwing the owners of the business.

What's happening at Motorola might be part of a trend. It seems that poison pill clauses are being made more palatable for shareholders, according to reports.

Does that signal a change in the corporate climate as a result of increased shareholder activism?

Maybe, but it's by no means universal. In Japan, companies are still using it and Japanese business is still struggling with notions of corporate governance, reports the Financial Times. You can read the FT piece here.