I can't say that I am very well versed on this case (or the legal points in question) but this sounded like a reasonable argument from Motorola.
It seems impressive that Apple's lawyers are going to get a peek at the Google side of things from this.
This is why I am always very careful before I spend over $12 billion on anything...
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
Reportedly Motorola is not permitted to make new decisions on patents (actually any business decision that could affect the value of Motorola) after the date they accepted Google's offer to purchase. There's no reliable claim they needed Google's permission to continue any actions they had already started. The action against Apple predates Google's offer to purchase.
I wonder how long it will be before Apple has enough trial tested patents to go after Google directly.
I'm no lawyer, but I would guess that any patent which wins for Apple in court, but remains implemented in Android after the trial concludes would constitute willful infringement for triple damages should Apple go after Google directly.
Of course, the opposite is true as well, but I haven't heard of any Android patents being involved in any of the suits against Apple.
I'm gonna need a lot more popcorn.
Have they actually gone without workarounds on any Apple patents that held up? Keep in mind some litigation is going to happen. Apple knowingly applies for a lot of junk patents to put up a wall around their devices. By this I mean that they patent a lot of semi obscure things figuring that some of them will stick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman
This is also known as the "Proview Defense" ie. the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.
I'm fairly certain Apple used a similar defense in saying that Proview could only sue their dummy corporation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
And this is news? Like who didn't see this coming?
We all know Android is a STOLEN PRODUCT.
At some point Google's chickens were going to come home to roost.
You say this with a lot of certainty. This is what you've been told by the Apple news site, so you believe it. I recall this same site reported that before Andy Rubin left the board, he used to excuse himself from certain discussions pertaining to the (then upcoming) iphone. There has to be some distinction here, as Apple does not automatically own the rights to all touch screen phones worldwide.
[
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
In that case... fry the bastards
But seriously... whether Schmidt saw a prototype iPhone in late 2006... or the finished iPhone in January 2007... it doesn't really matter.
At least Android was finally inspired by the iPhone
These kinds of projects can take years to develop fully. Will you also claim that the iphone ripped off the LG prada phone? Some of you guys really need to get over your infatuations with Steve Jobs, and that doesn't mean you need to completely switch to hating anything produced by Apple.
Gee. Who would of thought this would of turned into a troll-trollbait argument? LOL
First of all, there's nothing wrong with being influenced by or borrowing ideas from something else - this happens all the time and it is in fact how things progress, but for anyone to say that Google was not influenced in any way what-so-ever by the iPhone is either blind or just really stupid. Android was being demo'ed in 2006 and 2007, both of those times it was clearly an answer to the Blackberry. After the iPhone, Google obviously went back to the drawing board. If they didn't, why did it take almost two more years after the original unveiling of the iPhone before the first Android device was brought to market? iPhone Jan. '07 ... T-Mobile G1 October '08. Especially since Android was started towards the beginning of the decade. Furthermore, Google's answer to the iPad followed the EXACT SAME path, iPad Jan. '10, Honeycomb March '11. I mean honestly, where exactly is Google leading? They didn't even have the foresight to see the tablet market, they were trying to push ChromeOS onto netbooks. They were going after what was already out there, not trying to think of any new possibilities.
Sorry, but Apple changed the mobile UI paradigm. True Android doesn't look exactly like iOS, or Windows Phone Metro isn't even close, but the fact is, Apple came in and changed how people thought about user interfaces on mobile devices. Before the iPhone, yes there were grids of apps on home screens, but EVERY UI was point-and-click, and menu driven just as it had been on full desktop OS's decades prior.
Where in this thread is anyone suggesting Apple didn't change the game?
These kinds of projects can take years to develop fully. Will you also claim that the iphone ripped off the LG prada phone? Some of you guys really need to get over your infatuations with Steve Jobs, and that doesn't mean you need to completely switch to hating anything produced by Apple.
I can go along with the idea that Eric Schmidt might have taken a look at the iPhone before its release.
But the iPhone, as you say, took years to develop... from mid-2004 to 2007 according to Steve.
When did anyone from Apple go to South Korea to the LG headquarters and look around? The first time anyone even saw the LG Prada was late 2006.
By that time... the iPhone was complete and in testing.
What exactly could Apple have "ripped off" from LG?
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
Motorola's argument was apparently a good one. Judge Richard "Rockstar" Posner found it persuasive and denied Apple's very broad request for documents involving Android and Google. He's told Apple if there's something specific they are requesting they need to say so.
Comments
I can't say that I am very well versed on this case (or the legal points in question) but this sounded like a reasonable argument from Motorola.
It seems impressive that Apple's lawyers are going to get a peek at the Google side of things from this.
This is why I am always very careful before I spend over $12 billion on anything...
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
Reportedly Motorola is not permitted to make new decisions on patents (actually any business decision that could affect the value of Motorola) after the date they accepted Google's offer to purchase. There's no reliable claim they needed Google's permission to continue any actions they had already started. The action against Apple predates Google's offer to purchase.
I wonder how long it will be before Apple has enough trial tested patents to go after Google directly.
I'm no lawyer, but I would guess that any patent which wins for Apple in court, but remains implemented in Android after the trial concludes would constitute willful infringement for triple damages should Apple go after Google directly.
Of course, the opposite is true as well, but I haven't heard of any Android patents being involved in any of the suits against Apple.
I'm gonna need a lot more popcorn.
Have they actually gone without workarounds on any Apple patents that held up? Keep in mind some litigation is going to happen. Apple knowingly applies for a lot of junk patents to put up a wall around their devices. By this I mean that they patent a lot of semi obscure things figuring that some of them will stick.
This is also known as the "Proview Defense" ie. the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.
I'm fairly certain Apple used a similar defense in saying that Proview could only sue their dummy corporation.
And this is news? Like who didn't see this coming?
We all know Android is a STOLEN PRODUCT.
At some point Google's chickens were going to come home to roost.
You say this with a lot of certainty. This is what you've been told by the Apple news site, so you believe it. I recall this same site reported that before Andy Rubin left the board, he used to excuse himself from certain discussions pertaining to the (then upcoming) iphone. There has to be some distinction here, as Apple does not automatically own the rights to all touch screen phones worldwide.
[
In that case... fry the bastards
But seriously... whether Schmidt saw a prototype iPhone in late 2006... or the finished iPhone in January 2007... it doesn't really matter.
At least Android was finally inspired by the iPhone
These kinds of projects can take years to develop fully. Will you also claim that the iphone ripped off the LG prada phone? Some of you guys really need to get over your infatuations with Steve Jobs, and that doesn't mean you need to completely switch to hating anything produced by Apple.
Gee. Who would of thought this would of turned into a troll-trollbait argument? LOL
First of all, there's nothing wrong with being influenced by or borrowing ideas from something else - this happens all the time and it is in fact how things progress, but for anyone to say that Google was not influenced in any way what-so-ever by the iPhone is either blind or just really stupid. Android was being demo'ed in 2006 and 2007, both of those times it was clearly an answer to the Blackberry. After the iPhone, Google obviously went back to the drawing board. If they didn't, why did it take almost two more years after the original unveiling of the iPhone before the first Android device was brought to market? iPhone Jan. '07 ... T-Mobile G1 October '08. Especially since Android was started towards the beginning of the decade. Furthermore, Google's answer to the iPad followed the EXACT SAME path, iPad Jan. '10, Honeycomb March '11. I mean honestly, where exactly is Google leading? They didn't even have the foresight to see the tablet market, they were trying to push ChromeOS onto netbooks. They were going after what was already out there, not trying to think of any new possibilities.
Sorry, but Apple changed the mobile UI paradigm. True Android doesn't look exactly like iOS, or Windows Phone Metro isn't even close, but the fact is, Apple came in and changed how people thought about user interfaces on mobile devices. Before the iPhone, yes there were grids of apps on home screens, but EVERY UI was point-and-click, and menu driven just as it had been on full desktop OS's decades prior.
Where in this thread is anyone suggesting Apple didn't change the game?
These kinds of projects can take years to develop fully. Will you also claim that the iphone ripped off the LG prada phone? Some of you guys really need to get over your infatuations with Steve Jobs, and that doesn't mean you need to completely switch to hating anything produced by Apple.
I can go along with the idea that Eric Schmidt might have taken a look at the iPhone before its release.
But the iPhone, as you say, took years to develop... from mid-2004 to 2007 according to Steve.
When did anyone from Apple go to South Korea to the LG headquarters and look around? The first time anyone even saw the LG Prada was late 2006.
By that time... the iPhone was complete and in testing.
What exactly could Apple have "ripped off" from LG?
I can go along with the idea that Eric Schmidt might have taken a look at the iPhone before its release.
But the iPhone, as you say, took years to develop... from mid-2004 to 2007 according to Steve.
When did anyone from Apple go to South Korea to the LG headquarters and look around? The first time anyone even saw the LG Prada was late 2006.
By that time... the iPhone was complete and in testing.
What exactly could Apple have "ripped off" from LG?
You really don't understand what he said huh? He isn't saying he believes that.
You really don't understand what he said huh? He isn't saying he believes that.
OOPS
My bad... reading fail
OOPS
My bad... reading fail
It happens...we are all overly emotionally invested in these corporations...lol
The problem with motorola's argument is that because of the merger motorola can't make any decisions on patents and lawsuits concerning them without first gaining approval for that action from google.
It was well published months ago that google is controlling motorola's actions because of the merger agreement contracts.
Motorola is not allowed to make decision by themselves on the patents without consulting google first.
Motorola's argument was apparently a good one. Judge Richard "Rockstar" Posner found it persuasive and denied Apple's very broad request for documents involving Android and Google. He's told Apple if there's something specific they are requesting they need to say so.