Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Pulls All 3G Devices Except iPhone 4S from German Online Store Following Motorola Patent Win [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is incorrect. Inventions that are perfectly obvious after the invention are the ones that are most worthy of patent protection.
These patents are around 15 years old. Were they obvious way back when an SMS was an amazing technology that was going to change the world? Back when Motorola blew people's minds by introducing the StarTac - a phone that could actually fold up and fit in your pocket?
Different radio hardware.
http://www.theverge.com/apple/2012/2/3/2768114/apple-iphone-ipad-removal-germanyTheVerge said:
You could be right, but the argument, that the iPhone 4S uses a different chip and thereby isn't affected, makes the most sense to me at the moment.
The original judgment was based on the argument that Motorola made a FRAND offer initially, but Apple refused it. Instead, Apple made a counter-offer that the original judge deemed to be non-FRAND. This put Apple into the category of wilful infringer.
Until Apple makes/accepts a truly FRAND offer, Motorola is totally within its rights to takes steps to prevent Apple from selling anything that continues to violate the patent. Yes, that equally applies to FRAND patents.
The instant Apple came back and offered/accepted a licensing deal that fit the definition of FRAND, Motorola would be compelled to immediately accept the deal and drop the injunction. Apple would still be on the hook to pay damages for past sales they made while they had been wilfully infringing.
The scenario is simple. Apple used patents that Motorola owns without paying for them. Apple will now be held liable until reasonable licensing fees are settled. And until that (or until an appeal) - Apple can't engage in certain commerce in Germany.
Is it a win for Motorola. Yes. Is it devastating to Apple? I don't think so. Although Apple did try and get Motorola to be on the hook for over 2 billion and the courts deemed it worth over 1 million for a bond.
If the situation was reversed, the usual suspects would be claiming victory and how Apple innovates and everyone else who "steals" from them should be brought down.
So some of the responses in this thread are not surprising in the slightest.
Is it a win for Motorola. Yes. Is it devastating to Apple? I don't think so. Although Apple did try and get Motorola to be on the hook for over 2 billion and the courts deemed it worth over 1 million for a bond.
If the situation was reversed, the usual suspects would be claiming victory and how Apple innovates and everyone else who "steals" from them should be brought down.
So some of the responses in this thread are not surprising in the slightest.
From December:
http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/9/2...an-patent-lawsuit-apple-sales-ban-iphone-ipad
Motorola filled the case on April 2.011 so it can't affect the iPhone 4, iPad 6 or iPod Nano 323
No, is not the correct argument
This is a easy one,
they steal the Apple phisical design and they told the lie that it is their innovation. Have you seen the Samsung ads?
they steal the Apple phisical design and they told the lie that it is their innovation. Have you seen the Samsung ads?
Yes, they will surely license the FRAND patents on the FRAND terms for products going forward, but they won't do that until the case is over-over-over, because licensing them beforehand is admitting to their validity (or so a court could decide). As for past damages, there will surely be arguments over that, but as they're not covered by FRAND any longer I don't see why the amount set should be linked to what the FRAND pricing would have been. Not licensing the patents did give Apple a competitive advantage, it damages the entire premise that FRAND operates on, etc, etc, etc.
In the meantime Motorola will take this win (and the other one) around Europe on a tourbus getting the products banned as they go.
So you agree with me...?
Isn't that what I've said, what is it 3 times now? Apple will have to pay for past infringements, Motorola will have to accept a reasonable licensing term, and then business as usual.
What exactly are you disagreeing with that I said?
Hattig said:
Yes, like I said Motorola can demand any extravagant, unreasonable amount they want for past infringements, but it's not like a judge is going to just let them have ten billion dollars for it. Apple will be hurt by the past infringements, and the loss of sales from pulling products, but its not going to make Apple go bankrupt...
google is almost the owner of Motorola. They need googles "ok" to force Apple to pull products.
I'm disagreeing with your assertion, which is quoted in my message above, that Motorola was refusing to accept a reasonable offer. Motorola made a reasonable offer, and Apple was the one that refused it.
Then Apple made a counter-offer, and a judge has ruled that Apple's counter-offer was non-FRAND. Therefore Motorola was within its rights to refuse it, because it was unreasonable.
Last edited:
Ah ok, got it. I apologize. At the end of the day, Apple will pay for infringement, and a reasonable offer will be accepted.
What a grossly inaccurate picture.
Where exactly are the 10+ lawsuites for Apple vs Samsung on that thing?
I think he doesn't agree with that:
And he doesn't agree because the courts have proven that is totally wrong. It has been proven that Motorola offered a FRAND licenses and was Apple the ones that didn't agree.
And is also wrong that Apple voluntarily set up this scenario
It's amazing that some people don't remember what they write in this short thread. If you're asserting that Motorola REFUSED to license the patent under reasonable terms - then you're falling short of the truth.
But since when has that stopped some posters and bloggers from insisting that they've been posting the truth all along.
But since when has that stopped some posters and bloggers from insisting that they've been posting the truth all along.
Given that most of Apples direct sales are online, quite a bit has changed. I think you need a new glass of koolaid as yours has clearly gone bad.
