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

12467

Comments

  • thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    ...at least don't bother linking to their comments, because that undermines the purpose of ignoring them.



    ConradJoe is unaware of or doesn't care about actual facts in this case, and has an anti-Apple bias. This commenter continues on here in spite of misbehavior because they generate thread posts in response to their tirades. The moderators seem to prefer to allow continuance of the behavior - so there you are. In any case this suit predates the "look and feel" suits that CJ is complaining about, so the contention that this is "pay-back" of course is stupid and silly - but what else is expected?



    According to the details of the case as published out on FOSS, Motorola actually went back to the chipmakers they had originally licensed the technology to under FRAND and specified that they could not sell the tech to Apple - in other words Motorola used their FRAND leverage to specified bias sales against Apple - apparently in order to slow down Apple sales, or gain revenue separate from the FRAND terms being covered by the chipmakers. If the chipmakers failed to comply Motorola would refuse to deal with them and their standardized technology could not be included in the chip feature set.



    Apple tried to challenge the bias direction of Motorola's attempt to extort money from Apple separate from all the other buyers of the chips in question - its a cutthroat move in a cutthroat business - and one of the reasons that Apple has maintained such a large "warchest" as the outcomes of these litigations is not cut and dried. Courts normally do not have a high degree of technical expertise and thus must try on the merits as presented. Unfortunately Motorola was very canny in using the German courts to try the case as they are known to not be FRAND-friendly, and thus gave Moto a chance to win. That being said, if the higher courts on appeal look at Moto's bias activity, they may decide against them, as the EU is reviewing FRAND policy to try and tighten things up on companies that rely on FRAND standard participation to support adoption of their technologies but then turn around and try to use that same position to extort money from sucess competitors in the marketplace.



    Well this time, leaving the entire quote is justified



    Thanks for the balanced, and quite insightful, reply.



    Being here "vorort", doesn't necessarily allow me to dive into the topic as deep as I would like to. Selling and setting up Macs and iOS devices is more than a full-time job, not including me design consultation business



    Thanks for taking the time out.
  • buzdotsbuzdots Posts: 388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    The Watch List:





    What does this mean?



    The Watch List:



    The State of North Carolina,
  • postulantpostulant Posts: 1,270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Thank you for the excellent and well reasoned post. I also agree on the over the top anti Apple crap being tolerated to add drama here. My ignore list is getting pretty long. My wish is replies to these numb skulls were also blocked if they are on your ignore list.



    Eh, I just skip over his posts. I still don't understand the victory dance, though.



    Everyone realizes they will settle and Apple will get back to making billions and Motorola will get back to being at the bottom and near irrelevant(think Xoom).
  • gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,039member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    According to the details of the case as published out on FOSS, Motorola actually went back to the chipmakers they had originally licensed the technology to under FRAND and specified that they could not sell the tech to Apple - in other words Motorola used their FRAND leverage to specified bias sales against Apple - apparently in order to slow down Apple sales, or gain revenue separate from the FRAND terms being covered by the chipmakers. If the chipmakers failed to comply Motorola would refuse to deal with them and their standardized technology could not be included in the chip feature set.





    source for that?
  • slapppyslapppy Posts: 331member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post


    Yes, because owning an Apple product vs Google or Windows makes you an intellectual giant. What a tube. I own three Macs, but use a Samsung Focus and a Playbook, where does that leave me? Smart for 12 hours of the day? You're worse than any "Fandroid."



    p.s. Eludes.



    Actually your continued support for a company (Samsung) who's business model is to copy and undercut products makes you hypocrite. You support Apple, a real innovator, yet you support Samsung/Google both IP thieves. You are a Fandroid.
  • freshmakerfreshmaker Posts: 468member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Germans may like their tech, but they also like morality.




    Lol history would disagree with you.
  • hill60hill60 Posts: 6,974member
    Is this patent one of the one's where Motorola terminates the license agreement of baseband chip makers, when they sell them to Apple?



    If so Motorola is going to experience a big bag of hurt when the EU cracks down on this anticompetitive behaviour.



    Motorola better have a good reason for discriminating against Apple in this way.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post


    Joking aside, the more of these details that come out, the more it seems that Apple didn't really play ball when it came to the patents for the iPhone. They just built it, released it and then worried about what they had infringed.... To be fair, they were coming into the game as newbies, but there's still a right and wrong way of doing things.



    If you seriously believe Apple (or anyone really) designs their products in this way, you are either insane or seriously deluded.



    You also know nothing about how Apple designs it's products, how the company works in general etc.



    [insult removed]
  • thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post


    Lol history would disagree with you.



    Regardless of the person and statement being replied to: that is a very SERIOUS and PATHETIC low blow! i.e. NOT FUNNY!
  • thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    If you seriously believe Apple (or anyone really) designs their products in this way, you are either insane or seriously deluded.



    You also know nothing about how Apple designs it's products, how the company works in general etc.



    [insult removed]



    Hee!hee! Good one
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,322member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    According to the details of the case as published out on FOSS, Motorola actually went back to the chipmakers they had originally licensed the technology to under FRAND and specified that they could not sell the tech to Apple - in other words Motorola used their FRAND leverage to specified bias sales against Apple - apparently in order to slow down Apple sales, or gain revenue separate from the FRAND terms being covered by the chipmakers. If the chipmakers failed to comply Motorola would refuse to deal with them and their standardized technology could not be included in the chip feature set.



    Apple tried to challenge the bias direction of Motorola's attempt to extort money from Apple separate from all the other buyers of the chips in question .



    The basic understanding that I have is similar to yours with one major piece left out. According to reports other than Florian's, Moto specified that Apple did not have a license to the patents because Apple had already signaled their intention to sue on grounds that the paten(s) were not valid to begin with and thus no payments should be due. If true then Motorola would be remiss is allowing a license to them if Apple's intent was to attack Moto over the patents validity, wouldn't you agree?
  • just_mejust_me Posts: 591member
    Does apple have any FRAND patents?
  • just_mejust_me Posts: 591member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post


    Lol history would disagree with you.



    Lol. History sucks sometimes
  • umrk_labumrk_lab Posts: 550member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post


    Fair points, but I meant from a more ethical standpoint - Steve Jobs made some serious noise (as do many others still on his behalf) about Google/Android and the way they played the game, this is no different. It may be more cost effective, but you can't accuse one company of being unethical then do it yourself, it's hypocrisy.



    .



    This is the difficult point. Are we talking about business or ethics (or justice ..) ? From business standpoint, all these matters are treated from the cost/benefit angle, that's all. As I am (nevertheless ...) an Apple fan, I should also say that in this particular case, there also seemed to be a question of validity of the patent, raised by Apple (I am not qualified to say whether this is justified or not).



    Given the tens (may be more) cases which are now currently brought to Justice (everyone accusing everyone, on many different subjects), anybody will anyhow find arguments to point at the "bad guy", based on the outcome of a particular case. It is clearly more complicated than that....



    Having said that (and I aggravate my case ...), it makes no doubt for me that some companies innovate, while others just copy. This does not always translate into Justice decisions, because justice is about legislation, not ethics ...



    As this argument will probably used against me, yes Steve did say that great artists copy. But in the context of this statement (Xerox innovations), it can be pinted out that :



    1) Xerox management knew what they were doing in showing their research results, and that was part of a deal (see Isaaccson's book)

    2) the Xerox interface only ran on a costly machine, and what Apple made out of it was clearly a vast improvement on many points, not just servile copy

    3) I have not heard of Xerox suing Apple (but may be my information is incomplete)
  • shompashompa Posts: 338member
    Since its a GPRS patent that Apple "breaks".

    Just turn of 2G. GPRS is a part of 2G, not 3G.



    Do Apple even have GPRS in their phones? The slowest I have seen is EDGE that is 10 times faster then GPRS.



    This will also accelerate Apples move to 4G. 4G devices would only have to be 3G backward compatible. Since 3G don't use GPRS, Apple should be in the clear.



    Does Google own this patent after buying Motorola mobile?
  • dualiedualie Posts: 330member
    Wouldn't this decision have consequences throughout the EU and not just in Germany?
  • conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KDMeister View Post


    So Apple comes out with a phone. In order to build a phone, you have to go out and buy parts which include wireless chips. So who should pay the FRAND? The companies that make the chips or the companies that put the chips together to make a phone. It seems unfair that companies like Motorola who contributed to world wireless standards get to double dip.



    If you are arguing for patent exhaustion, keep in mind that Apple either argued that and lost, or decided that it was not a good argument.
  • therealestmctherealestmc Posts: 65member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    Pay back is a bitch....



    Apple definitely deserved this one....



    True, they have been harassing everyone lately when their house is not even in order. Well, it does not matter to me as long as I am able to buy my apple products in the states. Only the investors have to worry.
  • shompashompa Posts: 338member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    If you seriously believe Apple (or anyone really) designs their products in this way, you are either insane or seriously deluded.



    You also know nothing about how Apple designs it's products, how the company works in general etc.



    [insult removed]



    To be fair: Most large companies do just like that.

    The fines that a company have to pay for breaking a patent is insignifacent to their revenue when a company is large enough.



    Not quite the same, but almost: MSFT abused its position and killed of Netscape. They had to pay a fine, but it was just a couple of % of a years profit. MSFT abused its position and overpriced its products and had to pay over a billion fine to EU. MSTF does not care. Its just a couple of % of a years profit.

    Same with Google. Youtube had illegal content. Googles fine is that they have to pay a couple of cent of the material when its played.

    Apple used Nokia's 3G technology in their phones. The settlement gave Nokia 500 million dollars. Apple have almost 30 billion in profit each year. 500 million does not matter.



    When a company is large enough they can do what they want.



    That is why Google can link to warez with its search engine.

    When thepiratebay does the same thing: many years jail time.



    Google App store is plagued with pirated apps. (since anyone can upload an app, just take a competitors app and upload its as yours). Rom emulators to play Nintendo/SEGA and other systems. Somehow Google are not punished.
  • conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post


    Oh really? Considering that a) there's no alternative to iOS yet, since Android has been shot out of the water here already last summer. Maybe you didn't understand the German press releases and reports telling all how Google is data-mining here, with everything, including Google Street View cars and Android.



    Germans love their Data Privacy rights FAR more than they will ever hate Apple for stepping on a FRAND patent... believe me.








    If what you say is true, then why is Apple spending millions in an attempt to not allow Germans to buy them?



    If what you say is true, then there would be no market in Germany for them, and Apple will have wasted resources.



    I don't believe that Apple got into a messy public pissing contest, using loser arguments, for no good reason. They saw the strategy as their best method to pull in the big bucks. They lost. Get over it.
Sign In or Register to comment.