Almost every other tech site existent reports that Motorola WON this injunction, but leave to to AI/DED to translate that into "Apple allows Motorola Mobility to win".
Talk about being trapped in Apple's RDF.
I disagree. If you read past the headlines, I'd say very few other tech sites are actually reporting this as a real Motoroal win. Most do not know what to make of this, IMO, and are presenting mixed messages.
But I do agree that it's premature to label this injunction as useless. Even Apple's own statement is circumspect.
Further, if the ban has to be lifted later on, Moto has to pay damage compensations to Apple. Can Motorola afford this ? Moto is betting BILLIONS of dollars with that action, can they stem that ?
Seems very unlikely to me. got any evidence that your statement is true?
Motorola Mobility Wins Injunction Against Apple in Germany [German Courts Have Found Apple to Infringe on 2 Motorola Patents; Might Ban Apple From Selling iPhone & iPad in the Country]
Sounds pretty far fetched to me. Can you cite any precedent? Any statutes? Anything?
Precedents? In imagination, the cops were shaking last time I didn't show up for court to defend my speeding ticket. They knew the full extent of my Machiavellian ways when I subsequently paid the ticket.
But seriously, it's a silly observation to say that the injunction is anti-competitive behaviour. In that case, Apple has been rather anti-competitive. But those making this observation are trying to depict this injunction as a brilliant Apple trap.
Precedents? In imagination, the cops were shaking last time I didn't show up for court to defend my speeding ticket. They knew the full extent of my Machiavellian ways when I subsequently paid the ticket.
But seriously, it's a silly observation to say that the injunction is anti-competitive behaviour. In that case, Apple has been rather anti-competitive. But those making this observation are trying to depict this injunction as a brilliant Apple trap.
So you do not believe that using FRAND patents to block the sale of a strong competitors device is anti-competitive?
Any of you claiming that this is the same as Apple's injunctions. FRAND patents are fair game for blocking competition? Even if the competitor is willing to pay the FRAND rates?
I am repeating myself, but you guys sound like high school girls protecting your clique. Go ahead and block/ignore me if you like (if not already), but I am doing you a service here with this observation.
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
The only service you're doing is wasting kilocalories DEFENDING these trolls.
If you visit Florian Mueller's FOSS website and view his background, there is no mention of training in patent practice in any country. He only asserts that he is a "intellectual property activist-turned-analyst". He is not listed on the US Patent Office's registry of patent attorneys and patent agents (a legal requirement for US patent practitioners) and there is no evidence on his blog that he claims any legal training or licensure at all in either the US or in Europe. He has not listed himself on the EPO's list of professional representatives. There is no evidence on his blog that he has ever worked for a law firm in any capacity. Does this character have any training or experience at all that would qualify him to interpret the complex German patent laws and the German appeals process? Why do the news media give this bozo any credence at all?
I am repeating myself, but you guys sound like high school girls protecting your clique. Go ahead and block/ignore me if you like (if not already), but I am doing you a service here with this observation.
Well "mr. I'm a shining example"- reread both our posts. You set the bar lower, not higher.
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
Around here, any of those phrases can mean anything a poster wishes them to.
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
So that would make you the "Tallest" School Girl?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
The only service you're doing is wasting kilocalories DEFENDING these trolls.
Am I defending anyone? If anything, I am actually defending you, by observing that you are better than this.
Well "mr. I'm a shining example"- reread both our posts. You set the bar lower, not higher.
I'm no shining example of anything, and I don't give a hoot about the height of any bar. I call things as I see them. I am sure I am occasionally wrong. But I'm also sure that I have not engaged in xenophobic behaviour on this site. But clearly you and your clique do engage and indeed relish in it.
I have never told anyone not to return because their views oppose mine. I make commentary, sometimes with wicked sarcasm, about people's words and observations, but do not mark them with sophomoric labels or encourage others to banish them. Most importantly, I do not live under the delusion that using Apple products confers on me the same brilliance embedded in the design of the products themselves. Instead, I believe that Apple does some good things and also makes many missteps. Just because this is an Apple-oriented site does not mean the missteps cannot be criticized or mocked.
Your observation about Apple's response is a good one. It's definitely something they haven't done before, and it'll be interesting to see how they handle the rest of these sorts of cases as their former winning streak in the courts becomes an increasingly mixed bag of results.
It's quite telling that even "DED"/"Slash Lane"/"Prince McLean" has updated this article to omit the word "meaningless" from the headline. This loss in the German court is apparently not quite as dismissable as he had once hoped - from Mueller (AI's source on this story):
I didn't notice the change in headline. Good catch. I am not sold on Mueller's rationalization yet. As mentioned above, he is no more a patent lawyer than I. Admittedly, he is generally shrewd and in the know.
Not only is it unusual for Apple to respond. Their wording is circumspect. Furthermore, Motorola's public statement on this is also telling.
So you do not believe that using FRAND patents to block the sale of a strong competitors device is anti-competitive?
Any of you claiming that this is the same as Apple's injunctions. FRAND patents are fair game for blocking competition? Even if the competitor is willing to pay the FRAND rates?
It's amusing that people toss "FRAND" around here as if they really know the significance. What an impressively knowledgeable group!
AppleInsider bases a majority of their lawsuit stories on re-posted Mueller blog entries because historically they tend to spin things in ways that favor Apple.
And also because much of the recent action has take place in Europe, where Mueller resides (and he also knows German).
On the other hand, there was also a Dutch dude who was tweeting live from one of the Dutch courts. Don't think he was cited here much?
It's quite telling that even "DED"/"Slash Lane"/"Prince McLean" has updated this article to omit the word "meaningless" from the headline.
What??? How can DED, Slash, and Prince be the same person? I mean, clearly they have different names so they must be different people, because registering under different names will get you banned on AI.
Comments
Almost every other tech site existent reports that Motorola WON this injunction, but leave to to AI/DED to translate that into "Apple allows Motorola Mobility to win".
Talk about being trapped in Apple's RDF.
I disagree. If you read past the headlines, I'd say very few other tech sites are actually reporting this as a real Motoroal win. Most do not know what to make of this, IMO, and are presenting mixed messages.
But I do agree that it's premature to label this injunction as useless. Even Apple's own statement is circumspect.
Further, if the ban has to be lifted later on, Moto has to pay damage compensations to Apple. Can Motorola afford this ? Moto is betting BILLIONS of dollars with that action, can they stem that ?
Seems very unlikely to me. got any evidence that your statement is true?
By gaining the injunction, Motorola have indulged in anti-competitive behaviour,
Sounds pretty far fetched to me. Can you cite any precedent? Any statutes? Anything?
Apple loses to Motorola in German Lawsuit
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2011/11/app...erman-lawsuit/
German court grants injunction against Apple for infringement of Motorola patents
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/04/g...fringement-of/
Apple hit with an injunction for infringing Motorola patents in Germany
http://www.droidmatters.com/news/app...ts-in-germany/
Motorola reportedly secures injunction against Apple in Germany
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/motoro...-germany/62715
German Court Grants Motorola Injunction Against Apple
http://www.osnews.com/story/25300/Ge..._Against_Apple
Motorola granted injunction against Apple in Germany
http://www.phonedog.com/2011/11/04/m...le-in-germany/
Motorola confirms that a German court has granted it a patent injunction against Apple
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/11/...against-apple/
Motorola Mobility Wins Injunction Against Apple in Germany [German Courts Have Found Apple to Infringe on 2 Motorola Patents; Might Ban Apple From Selling iPhone & iPad in the Country]
http://nexus404.com/Blog/2011/11/04/...n-the-country/
How do those guys sleep at night?
Sounds pretty far fetched to me. Can you cite any precedent? Any statutes? Anything?
Precedents? In imagination, the cops were shaking last time I didn't show up for court to defend my speeding ticket. They knew the full extent of my Machiavellian ways when I subsequently paid the ticket.
But seriously, it's a silly observation to say that the injunction is anti-competitive behaviour. In that case, Apple has been rather anti-competitive. But those making this observation are trying to depict this injunction as a brilliant Apple trap.
Precedents? In imagination, the cops were shaking last time I didn't show up for court to defend my speeding ticket. They knew the full extent of my Machiavellian ways when I subsequently paid the ticket.
But seriously, it's a silly observation to say that the injunction is anti-competitive behaviour. In that case, Apple has been rather anti-competitive. But those making this observation are trying to depict this injunction as a brilliant Apple trap.
So you do not believe that using FRAND patents to block the sale of a strong competitors device is anti-competitive?
Any of you claiming that this is the same as Apple's injunctions. FRAND patents are fair game for blocking competition? Even if the competitor is willing to pay the FRAND rates?
I am repeating myself, but you guys sound like high school girls protecting your clique. Go ahead and block/ignore me if you like (if not already), but I am doing you a service here with this observation.
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
The only service you're doing is wasting kilocalories DEFENDING these trolls.
I am repeating myself, but you guys sound like high school girls protecting your clique. Go ahead and block/ignore me if you like (if not already), but I am doing you a service here with this observation.
Well "mr. I'm a shining example"- reread both our posts. You set the bar lower, not higher.
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
Around here, any of those phrases can mean anything a poster wishes them to.
Why do the news media give this bozo any credence at all?
My guess is that his cites to original source material, along with the cogent analysis he provides, each lend him sufficient credence.
The clear and concise writing style helps too - he presents close and complex questions with great clarity.
Quite an accomplishment for a man who has undergone no formal training, eh?
If by 'high school girls' you mean 'actual users' and by 'clique' you mean 'the sanctity of the forums and its protection from ABJECT TROLLING ACCOUNTS', then yeah, you're right.
So that would make you the "Tallest" School Girl?
The only service you're doing is wasting kilocalories DEFENDING these trolls.
Am I defending anyone? If anything, I am actually defending you, by observing that you are better than this.
Well "mr. I'm a shining example"- reread both our posts. You set the bar lower, not higher.
I'm no shining example of anything, and I don't give a hoot about the height of any bar. I call things as I see them. I am sure I am occasionally wrong. But I'm also sure that I have not engaged in xenophobic behaviour on this site. But clearly you and your clique do engage and indeed relish in it.
I have never told anyone not to return because their views oppose mine. I make commentary, sometimes with wicked sarcasm, about people's words and observations, but do not mark them with sophomoric labels or encourage others to banish them. Most importantly, I do not live under the delusion that using Apple products confers on me the same brilliance embedded in the design of the products themselves. Instead, I believe that Apple does some good things and also makes many missteps. Just because this is an Apple-oriented site does not mean the missteps cannot be criticized or mocked.
Your observation about Apple's response is a good one. It's definitely something they haven't done before, and it'll be interesting to see how they handle the rest of these sorts of cases as their former winning streak in the courts becomes an increasingly mixed bag of results.
It's quite telling that even "DED"/"Slash Lane"/"Prince McLean" has updated this article to omit the word "meaningless" from the headline. This loss in the German court is apparently not quite as dismissable as he had once hoped - from Mueller (AI's source on this story):
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...ently-won.html
I didn't notice the change in headline. Good catch. I am not sold on Mueller's rationalization yet. As mentioned above, he is no more a patent lawyer than I. Admittedly, he is generally shrewd and in the know.
Not only is it unusual for Apple to respond. Their wording is circumspect. Furthermore, Motorola's public statement on this is also telling.
So you do not believe that using FRAND patents to block the sale of a strong competitors device is anti-competitive?
Any of you claiming that this is the same as Apple's injunctions. FRAND patents are fair game for blocking competition? Even if the competitor is willing to pay the FRAND rates?
It's amusing that people toss "FRAND" around here as if they really know the significance. What an impressively knowledgeable group!
AppleInsider bases a majority of their lawsuit stories on re-posted Mueller blog entries because historically they tend to spin things in ways that favor Apple.
And also because much of the recent action has take place in Europe, where Mueller resides (and he also knows German).
On the other hand, there was also a Dutch dude who was tweeting live from one of the Dutch courts. Don't think he was cited here much?
It's quite telling that even "DED"/"Slash Lane"/"Prince McLean" has updated this article to omit the word "meaningless" from the headline.
What??? How can DED, Slash, and Prince be the same person? I mean, clearly they have different names so they must be different people, because registering under different names will get you banned on AI.