Sidebar Sidebar
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]

Then Samsung should sell a brick with tons of chips, and stop copying Apple design, features, icon images, AC adapters, and cable connectors:
http://www.cultofmac.com/116250/samsung-does-not-copy-apple-at-all-sure/

Samsung has a 3G patent, is licensed to Broadcom to make a 3G chip, Apple pays Broadcom for the chip and now Samsung is saying Apple has to pay Samsung too. That does not make sense, and was pronounced as bogus by a judge.

But, Samsung makes good washing machines!


adamtore said:
I am afraid the only bogus suits are Apples fault.

Samsung and Moto are suing over true tech. patents and not community designs. Apple has no in-house tech what so ever.
Click to expand...
 
samcraig said:
1) Motorola hasn't brought anything useful in the mobile phone arena? You mean actual phones? Subjective. Technology? Couldn't be more wrong.
Click to expand...

Moto's products are lousy and so is their service. Derivative, undifferentiated junk (unless "fugly" counts as differentiation.) There's a reason they needed a buyout. They were tanking.

But I'm sure that's what Sanjay Jha told the board: "B-b-but we invented the cellphone like 30 years ago!" Uh-huh.

Those who fail to re-invent their business end up as buyout-bait with nothing left but an old trove of patents, most of which they try to wield around (or abuse) for FRAND licensing dollars. Like an old hooker way past her sell-by date.
 
the8thark said:
1. True. But many can not do this as well.

2. People just pay out *LTD* just like you are. Total BS. He said some interesting things here and people's extreme hate for him blinds them from actually seeing how good his posts are.

I would be ashamed of you if I knew you and posters like you could do any better. But I feel they can not. So you live in your dream world. And I'll live in the reality and will always enjoy reading *LTD*'s posts.
Click to expand...

You must be new here. Welcome!

Define interesting. If it isn't 'blindly Apple-supporting', then I suggest you click on his username, select 'Find more posts by *LTD*', take a gander and get back to me.

Enjoy your stay :)

*LTD* said:
This is Apple gear we're talking about. Consumers will get to it by any means possible. And this is only in Germany. Where the 4S is still for sale through usual channels.

LOL wake up. This is the Apple of 2012.

http://mashable.com/2012/01/24/apple-quarter-by-the-numbers/
Click to expand...

The 'everybody-loves-Apple' argument! Tsk tsk, I've come to expect more from you.
 
oliversl said:
Then Samsung should sell a brick with tons of chips, and stop copying Apple design, features, icon images, AC adapters, and cable connectors:
http://www.cultofmac.com/116250/samsung-does-not-copy-apple-at-all-sure/

Samsung has a 3G patent, is licensed to Broadcom to make a 3G chip, Apple pays Broadcom for the chip and now Samsung is saying Apple has to pay Samsung too. That does not make sense, and was pronounced as bogus by a judge.

But, Samsung makes good washing machines!
Click to expand...

they make good TVs too. :D
 
*LTD* said:
Moto's products are lousy and so is their service. Derivative, undifferentiated junk (unless "fugly" counts as differentiation.) There's a reason they needed a buyout. They were tanking.

But I'm sure that's what Sanjay Jha told the board: "B-b-but we invented the cellphone like 30 years ago!" Uh-huh.

Those who fail to re-invent their business end up as buyout-bait with nothing left but an old trove of patents, most of which they try to wield around (or abuse) for FRAND licensing dollars. Like an old hooker way past her sell-by date.
Click to expand...

The problem with Moto is they flooded the market with the derivative, undifferentiated junk in the span of 3 months. Bionic (LOL), Razr, Razr Maxx, Droid 4 (and that's just Verizon, I don't even know what they did on the other carriers).

I think Jha realized that throwing every possible phone on the wall doesn't work. This year, I'm sure they'll stop with the ridiculous amount of phones.
 
*LTD* said:
Dollars speak. And we're talking about a closed, unlicensed platform, on a limited number of devices.
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Show some hubris- make up some facts to a. humiliate me and b. establish your position as the #1 Apple fan!
 
Maltz said:
Um, neither. They agreed to pull those products after their loss in court. They're probably lucky they didn't have to pull the 4S, unless it's been redesigned to avoid the patent issue somehow.
Click to expand...

MH01 said:
So is Apple trying to push their 4S, or just sulking?
Click to expand...

Tiger8 said:
I think it was noted before that Apple went with a different approach with 4S, it does not seem to use any of Motorola Patents.
Click to expand...

I *think* the Motorola lawsuit was started before the 4S existed and therefore it was not included in the lawsuit. Incidentally, the patents Moto issuing here are FRAND which means that an injunction does not seem to be the correct remedy (hence the suspension). FRAND patents need to be licensed under fair and reasonable terms. I believe that Apple is also claiming that Moto is double-dipping since the Qualcomm chips that they are using already license the patent. But if Apple implements it as well, then they also need to pay. Moto just needs to offer Apple the same terms they offer every other licensee (Samsung is getting into trouble in Europe for attempting enforce FRAND patents too).

Incidentally, Apple's strategy of "injunction over license/cross-license" when suing competitors has brought about a very hostile atmosphere of recent. This is nothing new for Apple, they have rarely licensed their innovations. However, every company has innovations. Seeking injunctions puts you in a very bad position when your competitor comes up with a technology that you want even if they don't have one you want today.
 
Last edited:
BC2009 said:
I *think* the Motorola lawsuit was started before the 4S existed and therefore it was not included in the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Motorola filed suit against Apple with the 4S in the US, and the equivalent patent was not named. The 4S does not violate the German case's patent.
 
Aw... 140 wasted posts

<<Just hours after word began to spread that Apple was forced to pull most of its 3G devices from its German online store following an injunction awarded to Motorola, the iPhone maker successfully had the ruling suspended and has recommenced sales.>>
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I'm wondering how Apple is losing their patent wars, and others' as well...
 
BC2009 said:
I *think* the Motorola lawsuit was started before the 4S existed and therefore it was not included in the lawsuit. Incidentally, the patents Moto issuing here are FRAND which means that an injunction does not seem to be the correct remedy (hence the suspension). FRAND patents need to be licensed under fair and reasonable terms. I believe that Apple is also claiming that Moto is double-dipping since the Qualcomm chips that they are using already license the patent. But if Apple implements it as well, then they also need to pay. Moto just needs to offer Apple the same terms they offer every other licensee (Samsung is getting into trouble in Europe for attempting enforce FRAND patents too).

Incidentally, Apple's strategy of "injunction over license/cross-license" when suing competitors has brought about a very hostile atmosphere of recent. This is nothing new for Apple, they have rarely licensed their innovations. However, every company has innovations. Seeking injunctions puts you in a very bad position when your competitor comes up with a technology that you want even if they don't have one you want today.
Click to expand...

Putting aside iCloud, like someone stated earlier, the iPhone 4S (and indeed the iPhone 4 CDMA Verizon) both use Qualcomm Chip which is already covered since Qualcomm is paying royality for it. It is relatively easy to add an additional product to a lawsuit (just like Apple added the Tab N minutes after it debuted in Australia).

Given that iPhone 4 CMDA does not exist in Europe, then only iPhone 4S has been saved.
 
Do you honestly think people have that much time free time on their hands?
First to go through the trouble of creating an email account for each MR account they want, create the MR account and then to sit around and troll posts?

You have a lot of long standing MR members who are pretty sick of the "Apple is god" and "Apple can do no wrong" types of posts.

The only time I'll ever down vote a post is if it is a flat out lie or grossly exaggerated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Suing over FRAND patents is the lowest of the low. You can't make a device without using that patent, that's why it's called a standard.

Apple on the other hand sues mostly for design, UI implementations, which is something you can make a device without. Make it resemble something else.
 
lukarak said:
Suing over FRAND patents is the lowest of the low. You can't make a device without using that patend, that's why it's called a standard.

Apple on the other hand sues mostly for design, UI implementations, which is something you can make a device without. Make it resemble something else.
Click to expand...

Apple sued Samsung for having a "rectangular" tablet.... That is the lowest of the low.
 
oliversl said:
How about Samsung suing Apple in that 3G patent? That 3G patent that Broadcom uses, and that 3G patent that Broadcom pay for to sell the chip.
Click to expand...

Not Broadcom. You're thinking of Infineon:

Samsung sued Apple because, prior to being bought out by Intel, Infineon didn't automatically include 3G license fees with their chip prices. Samsung claims that Apple owes them FRAND terms for prior to that time.

At first claiming the patents didn't apply to them, Apple rejected Samsung's original FRAND terms.

Later, Apple decided they do want those terms after all. Samsung says no, you rejected those when offered, now everything after that time is more. The case judge in California also warned Apple that they do not get to go backward in time, just because _now_ they want to agree to the lower rate... after delaying an agreement for years.

That's the last status I heard for that case. I don't think there's been a trial yet. I suspect the judge is hoping they'll come to an agreement beforehand, just as Apple did with Nokia before the trial could start.
 
thenerdal said:
Apple sued Samsung for having a "rectangular" tablet.... That is the lowest of the low.
Click to expand...

It is not. Why didn't they sue other tablet manufacturers? Samsung has been copying everything, from packaging, chargers and so on. Samsung's own lawyers didn't distinguish between the two, that's how much alike they are.
 
lukarak said:
It is not. Why didn't they sue other tablet manufacturers? Samsung has been copying everything, from packaging, chargers and so on. Samsung's own lawyers didn't distinguish between the two, that's how much alike they are.
Click to expand...

They didn't sue other manufacturers because Samsung was Apple's biggest threat. Samsung's lawyers couldn't tell the difference between the two because they were 10 feet away.
 
According to FOSS, the injunction suspension is only good for a short time, and Apple likely had to put up a 120 million Euro bond to get it.

Also apparently Apple has submitted another offer to Motorola.

It looks like Apple is trying to buy a few days' or weeks' time to come to a deal with Moto before the sales injunction kicks back in.

.
 
Last edited:
makingdots said:
Well, an android tard can create many macrumors account just to down-vote a post on an APPLE site/forums.
Click to expand...

Yeah that must be it. Us Android 'tards' create new emails and new accounts stemming from that just to click that down arrow :rolleyes:

lukarak said:
Suing over FRAND patents is the lowest of the low. You can't make a device without using that patent, that's why it's called a standard.
Click to expand...

A patent is a patent. If Apple didn't pay then Apple can't use it. Simple as that. Don't care if the patent is Apple's, HTC's or Motorola's.

Apple on the other hand sues mostly for design, UI implementations, which is something you can make a device without. Make it resemble something else.
Click to expand...

You're right. Apple's 'patents' on black rectangular faces with rounded corners and a screen on the front with a black bezel are things which you can make devices without.

samsungs-galaxy-tab.jpg


:rolleyes:

voonyx said:
Its the same four guys doing it. Just seems like more because of multiple accounts. Strangely they are now silent and downvoting is their only reprieve.
Click to expand...

Usernames and proof? I haven't yet found a way to see the members who are voting on posts, maybe you have?

lukarak said:
It is not. Why didn't they sue other tablet manufacturers? Samsung has been copying everything, from packaging, chargers and so on. Samsung's own lawyers didn't distinguish between the two, that's how much alike they are.
Click to expand...

You're right. Samsung are copying everything, down to the rectangular face and (how dare they!) having a screen with a bezel!

samsung-ipad-photo-frame.jpg

(circa. 2006)
 
MH01 said:
So is Apple trying to push their 4S, or just sulking?
Click to expand...

I wonder if this will push Apple devices on to 4G?

I wonder if that kind of tactic would work? One part of the line is banned, so you pull all phones from that country. My guess is that people, fickle as we are, would just find a new phone. Would be great for the black market phones those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back