Motorola wins major injunction against Apple's iPhone, iPad in Germany

24567

Comments

  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post


    So, Motorola refuses to license a FRAND patent.. and they get an injunction?



    Mmmm, no. Have you read the article?
  • red oakred oak Posts: 508member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mknopp View Post


    To those of you wondering about the FRAND issue, you really need to read the link to the FOSS blog. It does a pretty good job of covering that issue. What I am unclear on is whether Apple did or did not actually pay Motorola FRAND licenses. At one point is says that Motorola contacted Apple about paying in 2007. Then at another point it states that Apple made an offer to pay for them. Then at one point is mentions that Motorola's legal counsel argued that the FRAND doesn't apply because Apple retained the rights to try and prove the patent in question invalid, which makes it sound like they paid for the FRAND but are trying to invalidate the patent in question.



    So, I am really unclear as to whether Motorola did or did not actually receive any money for this patent.



    Whatever the case it is not as simple as it seems at first blush.



    The only issue that I really take issue with is the judges contention that Apple stands to only lose $134 million if the injunction is overturned. I don't know how fast German courts work, but I would guess that Apple makes this amount of money on the products in question in a single quarter.



    I read the FOSS blog, but I find him scattered and non-directional. It's always a lot of information but all over the map. One minute Apple is in a great position, next its products are about to be banned in Europe
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 16,574member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    In the HTC/IPCom case I mentioned above (also a German injunction), IPCom thinks they should get 2.5-3.5% of the device revenue. If the same applies to Apple and is granted, that will be a lot more than a couple of dollars per device. Perhaps $15 per infringing device might be closer.



    Asking for it and getting it are two different things.
  • conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Motorola Mobility on Friday won a major patent infringement decision against Apple in Germany, a ruling that includes an injunction against the iPhone and 3G-capable iPads.








    Apple has been hoisted by their own petard!
  • lfmorrisonlfmorrison Posts: 697member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post


    So, Motorola refuses to license a FRAND patent.. and they get an injunction? Un.. fucking... believable



    There appears to be conflicting information on that point. Apparently Motorola approached Apple about obtaining a license in 2007, and Apple decided not to take out a license at that time. It's been reported that this was perhaps because Apple didn't believe the patent was legitimate and wanted to have it invalidated in the future.



    Well, until Motorola sued Apple, Apple wouldn't have had any standing to attempt to initiate proceedings to invalidate Motorola's patent. And from Motorola's perspective, if Motorola really did approach Apple about selling a reasonably priced license, and if Apple refused Motorola, then Motorola will have satisfied all of its obligations under FRAND terms, and they would be totally in the clear to initiate legal proceedings against Apple.



    If the initial premise was correct -- if Apple always had the intention to attempt to invalidate Motorola's patent -- then the course of events that has followed would have been exactly what Apple wanted to happen, according to the only strategy that could have them led them to obtaining standing to attempt to have the patent invalidated.
  • davidwdavidw Posts: 755member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    Pay back is a bitch....



    Apple definitely deserved this one....



    Unless Motorola Mobility (soon to be own by Google) can force Apple into a cross license agreement so they can use some of Apples' patents in Android phones, it's not considered a victory for Motorola Mobility. Apple is more than willing to pay a fair price to license the Motorola patents in question. If Motorola patents are essential to the working of a mobile device, then Motorola must license the patents to Apple at the same price they license it to others under FRAND. Apple couldn't care less about paying for the license with money and Motorola (Google) couldn't care less about getting any money from Apple. Pay back is a bitch when Motorola Mobility (Google) has to remove Apple patents from their Android devices or otherwise take them off the market, because Apple patents aren't FRAND and thus Apple don't have to license them out to anyone.
  • srangersranger Posts: 469member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KPOM View Post


    How so? Motorola apparently refused to license the patents on FRAND terms because Apple wanted to reserve the right to contest the patent. It sounds like Motorola was the one overreaching.



    Anyway, Motorola's attorney in Germany is also the same one who got the Samsung injunction lifted. Perhaps Apple should think about switching law firms.



    It sounds like the only matter under actual dispute is the amount of royalties Apple will pay Motorola. Apple wants to pay FRAND rates while Motorola wants more.



    I doubt that Motorola would have even sued them if Apple had not started all of this look and feel lawsuit crap.....
  • kpomkpom Posts: 516member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Asking for it and getting it are two different things.



    The whole dispute seems to be over the royalty amount. Apple wants to pay FRAND rates while disputing the validity of the patent. Motorola Mobility wants to charge more than FRAND for that period from 2007 to whenever it was that Apple first approached them about a license.



    Neither stock is moving much today, so I'm guessing what will happen is that this will force a relatively quick settlement, depending on what results Apple gets at the appeals court.



    Given that the EU is currently investigating Motorola Mobility over its use of FRAND patents, my guess is that this will serve as some sort of cap on the level of damages they actually seek. However, they have a very good attorney who was able to convince the court that $134 million was sufficient bond to enforce the injunction.
  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DavidW View Post


    If Motorola patents are essential to the working of a mobile device, then Motorola must license the patents to Apple at the same price they license it to others under FRAND



    No, they don't have to ask the same, they must ask a fair and non discriminatory amount.



    Nokia had money AND licenses from Apple
  • red oakred oak Posts: 508member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KPOM View Post




    Given that the EU is currently investigating Motorola Mobility over its use of FRAND patents, my guess is that this will serve as some sort of cap on the level of damages they actually seek.



    Excellent point
  • conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by t2af View Post


    Could be expensive for Apple - they should have just licensed it in 2007.







    Apple thinks that it is cheaper to ask a judge for forgiveness than to ask an IP owner for permission.



    Too bad Apple decided upon a "don't license, litigate instead" strategy. I hope that they have learned something from all this. Just because they have more money than other companies, they are NOT invincible, and while the wheels of justice turn slowly, the miscreant lawbreaker will always have his day of reckoning.



    Too bad the day of reckoning involves the biggest market in all of Europe, and too bad the day is during the busiest selling time of the entire year. But criminals who steal other people's stuff can't choose when they get punished.



    Apple fans need to hang their heads in shame.
  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KPOM View Post


    Given that the EU is currently investigating Motorola Mobility over its use of FRAND patents





    EU is not investigating Motorola, they have asked Samsung and Apple about the litigations they have and Almunia have said that they will ask more parties but there is no formal investigation ongoing
  • kpomkpom Posts: 516member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    I doubt that Motorola would have even sued them if Apple had not started all of this look and feel lawsuit crap.....



    I disagree. Motorola Mobility was looking to use a rather ordinary patent as a gold mine, much the same way that Microsoft has done with Android licensees.
  • davidwdavidw Posts: 755member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    In the HTC/IPCom case I mentioned above (also a German injunction), IPCom thinks they should get 2.5-3.5% of the device revenue. If the same applies to Apple and is granted, that will be a lot more than a couple of dollars per device. Perhaps $15 per infringing device might be closer.



    The question is how much are others paying Motorola for a license to use the patents in question. If the patents are essential for the working of a mobile device then Motorola can not force Apple to pay more than what they charge others for the same license. So is Motorola getting 2.5-3.5% per device from the others?
  • ksecksec Posts: 1,087member
    Just want to know if Motorola in this case is the Motorola from Google.
  • kpomkpom Posts: 516member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Apple thinks that it is cheaper to ask a judge for forgiveness than to ask an IP owner for permission.



    Too bad Apple decided upon a "don't license, litigate instead" strategy. I hope that they have learned something from all this. Just because they have more money than other companies, they are NOT invincible, and while the wheels of justice turn slowly, the miscreant lawbreaker will always have his day of reckoning.



    Apple approached Motorola years ago about licensing the patents on FRAND terms. Motorola Mobility decided to play hardball.



    Apple is more than happy to settle out of court. Nokia is a good example. Nokia has far more patents than Motorola Mobility and has done more to develop mobile communications standards than anyone else. They had a brief war of words, but then later came to an amicable settlement.
  • conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post




    To be fair, they were coming into the game as newbies, but there's still a right and wrong way of doing things.







    They are NOT newbies.



    Apple has more lawyers than most companies have employees. The suits were advised of every detail and nuance. The Apple suits gambled that they could get away with stealing, and that stealing stuff would make them richer.



    Apple knew EXACTLY what it was doing. Apple knew EXACTLY what the stakes were. Apple tried to sleaze its way into profits, but has been caught with its hand in the cookie jar.





    All the suits who decided to steal as a business strategy should be fired. Every last one of them.
  • slapppyslapppy Posts: 331member
    It's funny how these iHaters are so giddy when Apple loses. The fact that their own favorite toys are emulating Apple in almost every way alludes their little pea sized brains. Without Apple you guys will still be using a stylus to work your "smartphone". Without Apple, pushing the boundaries of hardware and software, you pea brains would still be rocking with your chicklet keyboards.
  • glen.georgeglen.george Posts: 1member
    Guess some people from Androidcentral and Phandroid have landed here by mistake. Please go troll elsewhere. If u dont know squat about law, dont speculate and talk out of your sorry bottom. Its not like Motorola will enforce the ban so easily. Its not so simple for them either and implications are huge for both
  • thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Oh Baby! My biz here in Germany since this morning has just rocketed stratospheric!



    Thank you Motorola, for getting the "fence-sitters" to commit... because fact is, nobody but nobody wants the alternative to Apple iOS products... but there were more than a few of my clients that thought they could wait until prices went down after the holidays, or the new iPad 3 comes out.



    Biggest complaint is that I wont have a vacation until end of February... bit I can deal with it



    PS. Anyone think it's bad of me for not telling my clients that it's probably not enforceable until next year... and even then it will probably be a monetary settlement?
Sign In or Register to comment.