Motorola's seven-patent ITC complaint against Apple detailed

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 69
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Van Lustre View Post


    I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?


     


    How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!

     



     


    Probably in the same way that they have been defending themselves against Motorola's attacks ever since MOTOROLA STARTED THIS BY SUING APPLE FIRST.

  • Reply 22 of 69
    markbyrnmarkbyrn Posts: 609member


    So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)    

  • Reply 23 of 69

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Yeah, how dare they legally protect their intellectual property.



     


    Just when I wonder if Tallest Skil's pre-emptive postings at the beginning of a thread are a little excessive, we have a fresh bunch of trolls taking a piss here. And I'm quoting TS rather than the poster he quoted since I don't want to mess up people's block lists.


     


    I've decided I'd rather read TS posts in the beginning. That at least stops these newbie trolls and only the veterens come out to show us how wrong we are.

  • Reply 24 of 69
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member


    Hmmm, that's interesting. 


     


    I thought Apple were the 'innovator for the world?'


     


    That's what Cook said right? Someone correct me if i'm wrong

  • Reply 25 of 69
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by Van Lustre View Post

    I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?


     


    How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!





    Originally Posted by Van Lustre View Post


    …Apple's really ridicules patent such as: rectangle with rounded corners, swipe to unlock, tried to patent multi-touch which was already invented by Diamond Touch and…



     


    Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.


     


    What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment? image

  • Reply 26 of 69
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.

    What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment? :lol:

    No, I think the official list puts that one just after "Apple stole the GUI from Xerox".
  • Reply 27 of 69
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.


     


    What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment? image



    LOL! you know it!


     


    I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE imageimage image image image


     


    But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up. 


    You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil. 

  • Reply 28 of 69
    vaelianvaelian Posts: 446member
    Of all the patents, the only one that seems remotely valid is '580, as the others are either way too obvious or way too ambiguous. That said, I hope all of these companies take their patent litigation to the very end and get each other's devices banned. It is also interesting to see Google ask for so many devices to be banned based on a few patents while at the same time trying to argue that the Samsung Galaxy Nexus shouldn't be banned precisely on the same grounds.
  • Reply 29 of 69
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

    LOL! you know it!


     


    I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE imageimage image image image


     


    But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up. 


    You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil. 



     


    You're on ludicrously thin ice as it is. Do you really want to have to create a sleepy4 (which will be banned immediately)?

  • Reply 30 of 69
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    You're on ludicrously thin ice as it is. Do you really want to have to create a sleepy4 (which will be banned immediately)?



    What did I do? I just said your joke was funny? Geeeshhh, can't take a compliment. 


     


    You can dish it, but you sure can't take it, lol. 


     


    By the way, it started at sleepy3. There is no connection to sleepy1 through 2. 

  • Reply 31 of 69
    gustavgustav Posts: 824member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Van Lustre View Post


    I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?


     


    How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!

     



    An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.


     


    Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.


     


    This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.

  • Reply 32 of 69

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.


     


    Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.


     


    This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.



     


    "Consumer confusion" is hardly a requirement for an injunction. Do you have any sources to back up this claim?

  • Reply 33 of 69
    jamjamjamjam Posts: 17member
    gustav wrote: »
    An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.

    Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.

    This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.

    That argument just doesn't make sense, if Apple can lose sales to confusion, then it is possible that sales could be lost due to features included in in iPhones etc which are allegedly in breach of these patents. After all Siri was a major selling point, an injunction should be judged on the likely hood of upholding the claims, but I don't know what the criteria are.

    J
  • Reply 34 of 69
    jnjnjnjnjnjn Posts: 588member
    mstone wrote: »
    Why do you say that? The one I noted (673) was issued in the year 2000. Apple was not at all in the phone scene at that time. As I recall Motorola had some unique and functional voice recognition software on their phones at the time. Why shouldn't they patent it?

    I has nothing to do with the time the 'patent' is issued.
    Software patents should never be allowed.
    They stifle innovation and prevent independent software makers from writing great software.
    With software patents you can only write software if you are protected by a large corporation.
    Software - and thereby the investment in it - is already protected by copyright and that is sufficient.
    I am not at all impressed from what I read from the patent you mention.

    J.
  • Reply 35 of 69

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by PatchyThePirate View Post

     


     


    "Freedom of speech"? What a cry baby. Please don't go, we need your informed opinion to counter our fanaticism.


     



     


    Yeah, so what of it? Why don't you try to attack my argument instead of me? What you just did is called Ad Hominem, an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.


     


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post





    Dude, I'm not saying I completely disagree with you...but your candor does nothing to further discussion...

    And yes...the same bill of rights that allows you to say whatever you want as wantonly as possible allows me the same freedoms.


     


    =D If you want to debate I'm up for it.


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by markbyrn View Post


    So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)    



     


    Motorola is the first one to create wireless communication device called Cell Phone. They were also the first to innovate their first large phone into a more portable device.


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.


     


    What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment? image



     


    Your the same as PatchyThePirate. Since your a GM, I'm going to say.... No Comment


     


     


    P.S. I had to come back since I find it very entertaining. Call me hypocrite if you want.

  • Reply 36 of 69
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    van lustre wrote: »


    Well, no.. US Constitution Bill of Rights state that I have freedom of speech. I'll say what ever I want if it does not violate the terms, rules and condition of this forum but this will probably be my last post.

    If you look at some of Apple's really ridicules patent such as: rectangle with rounded corners, swipe to unlock, tried to patent multi-touch which was already invented by Diamond Touch and

    comparing to Google's patents you'll see that Apple isn't all that great. I seriously don't get why Apple Fans keep backing up Apple even if they make a ridicules lawsuit against other company.

    The bill of rights says you have freedom of speech. It does not grant you that right to come on to private property (eg a forum) and do whatever pleases you. If the moderators decide to delete posts that they disagree with, that's with their rights too.

    That said, most forums I've been to that weren't populated only by trolls, don't moderate things until someone crosses a legal line, and at that point it's more dangerous to allow the activity to continue. The android fans are more than welcome to come and defend their side of a debate, but do note the forum is part of "Apple Insider" and is not exactly a neutral playground. Are there even notable android fan sites?
  • Reply 37 of 69


    Originally Posted by Misa View Post

    Are there even notable android fan sites?


     


    A few. And you'll notice there are zero Apple trolls on any of them. And barely any posts that say good things about Apple at all.

  • Reply 38 of 69
    majjomajjo Posts: 574member
    Been reading about this over at Groklaw: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120820182004477

    Wow is all I have to say at this point. It looks like Google has revealed their hand. I'm eager to see how Apple responds.
  • Reply 39 of 69
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    majjo wrote: »
    Been reading about this over at Groklaw: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120820182004477
    Wow is all I have to say at this point. It looks like Google has revealed their hand. I'm eager to see how Apple responds.

    I have to laugh, though.
    This filing is by Quinn Emanuel, the same law firm that we've been watching represent Samsung against Apple in California. The mighty John Quinn's law firm, in other words

    Is that the same "mighty" firm that has been sanctioned 4 times by the judge in just one trial and who keeps violating direct judicial orders? And the one who managed their time so badly that Apple had hours to present the final evidence in the case without any rebuttal from Samsung? And the one where they voluntarily provided the evidence Apple needed to demonstrate that consumers were being confused?

    I'm not at all impressed with this "mighty" law firm.

    Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.

    So much for 'don't be evil'.
  • Reply 40 of 69
    shidellshidell Posts: 187member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.

    So much for 'don't be evil'.


     


    Yeah, Apple has never filed suit against Google. Even you know that they're trying to rack up wins prior to engaging Google so they have something to show in court.


     


    Apple started the patent wars. This is their fault. The patent system is a joke, a broken mess at best, and this is what comes of it.

Sign In or Register to comment.