Apple Requesting Potential Motorola Bond of Up to $16 Billion in German Patent Case

[Dammit Cubs]

What did you expect? This patent game is a joke but that's business. I find it funny people here complain and call apple "evil". This isn't evil, its business. Like any of you are affiliated with anything remotely close to this. This is big boy business and it gets serious because all companies have a small window and they take advantage of what you have. If Motorola wants to seriously play a patent war, put their money where their mouth is.

This is obviously a ploy to make royalties off these patents. And this day, tech companies generate just as much money on patents. If you are gonna try and block apple (the biggest technology company in the world), be prepared to open your wallet.

Else go away and crawl in your hole and actually make good phones and not a billion droids.

 

[malexandria]

Sleazy Tactics!

I'm sorry, but as someone who owns almost every Apple product category (macbook pro, iphone, ipod touch, and apple tv) this is about as low as you can get. So even if they don't win, they can tie up their competitors working capital, while they just sit on a pile of cash to do whatever the heck they want? That's just garbage Apple. Grow some guts and compete on your own terms but don't try and sue other people out of existence, especially by requiring this bond. It's absolutely dirty pool.

You didn't INVENT anything, you repackaged existing technologies into great designed products and you were smart enough to "patent" every little thing. But let's get real - Microsoft had tablets YEARS before the iPad and their ridiculous Surface product had a lot of the touchscreen components that make up iOS and Android YEARS before the iPad came out. Why MS didn't patent that stuff and couldn't abandon surface and use that interface on all their other stuff is beyond me.

 

[Abazigal]

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)

To be honest, with all the recent flurry of lawsuits, I can't even tell who is in the right or wrong any more.

All I can say is, may the best company win.

 

[Piggie]

Go Apple go!

Strategically take down Android and all the crap hardware that goes with it!!!

Can't wait for the day.

Really you are so silly,

And then Apple have zero need to worry about upgrading to keep sales, they will just bleed you of money for old tech for as long as they can.

 

[AidenShaw]

Wirefully posted (Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E))

That is because the trolling here with apple hatred and irrational behavior grows every day.

And the trolling here with apple lust and blind devotion and irrational behavior grows every day.

It goes both ways....

 

[gnasher729]

I'm sorry, but as someone who owns almost every Apple product category (macbook pro, iphone, ipod touch, and apple tv) this is about as low as you can get. So even if they don't win, they can tie up their competitors working capital, while they just sit on a pile of cash to do whatever the heck they want? That's just garbage Apple. Grow some guts and compete on your own terms but don't try and sue other people out of existence, especially by requiring this bond. It's absolutely dirty pool.

It's not dirty at all. Your problem is that you don't have a clue how this works and come to the wrong conclusion. Motorola is suing Apple for patent infringement and demands that Apple doesn't start its cloud service in Germany. Apple demands that _if_ Motorola insists that the cloud service isn't started, and a court agrees with the demand, then Motorola has to make sure that they can pay for resulting damages. However, Motorola can just allow Apple to start the cloud service, and then they don't have to show one penny.

So do you think it is Ok if Motorola causes huge damage to Apple's business, loses its court case, and then it turns it they have no money to pay for the damage? It is a very simple situation: _If_ Motorola insists on causing damage to Apple then they have to make sure they can pay for the damage. _If_ Motorola doesn't cause any damage to Apple then they don't have to provide any bond.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Lord Acton was right.

 

[DeathChill]

Wirefully posted (Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E))




And the trolling here with apple lust and blind devotion and irrational behavior grows every day.

It goes both ways....

But it is a forum for Apple enthusiasts. It's like going to an ice cream store and getting mad that it's full of ice cream lovers.

EDIT: I just want to say the word ice cream again.

 

[cire]

I'm sorry, but as someone who owns almost every Apple product category (macbook pro, iphone, ipod touch, and apple tv) this is about as low as you can get. So even if they don't win, they can tie up their competitors working capital, while they just sit on a pile of cash to do whatever the heck they want? That's just garbage Apple. Grow some guts and compete on your own terms but don't try and sue other people out of existence, especially by requiring this bond. It's absolutely dirty pool.

You didn't INVENT anything, you repackaged existing technologies into great designed products and you were smart enough to "patent" every little thing. But let's get real - Microsoft had tablets YEARS before the iPad and their ridiculous Surface product had a lot of the touchscreen components that make up iOS and Android YEARS before the iPad came out. Why MS didn't patent that stuff and couldn't abandon surface and use that interface on all their other stuff is beyond me.

That Apple reinvented the tablet...innovated it...reinvented the cellphone...innovated it...is not arguable. That you insist that Apple hasn't invented anything shows yourself to be unreasonable.

Plus get your facts straight. Microsoft tablets were a bad model...the same as the model they want to continue to use...the model of Mobile PCs. Microsoft Surface was not YEARs before iOS.

----------

And the trolling here with apple lust and blind devotion and irrational behavior grows every day.

It goes both ways....

What irrational behavior? Is that any behavior you disagree with? Each of us make a decision as to which products to use. Until a company produces vastly superior products, I will trust Apple to provide the best user experience available. Every "fanboy" here would agree. I have been called an Apple fanboy (or derivation of it) for 28 years. I have had the same arguments with the same type of people over that time, whether its about the desktop OS, Jobs preference for resolution over color, multiple floppy drives, the number of buttons on a mouse, Apple defending its IP against Microsoft... the list goes on. And over that whole time one thing has been almost always true: Apple products provide a better experience for the end users. When the company strayed from that, it nearly went bankrupt.

The Windroidsungs think they are being original in their bashing of Apple. I can assure them they are walking a well-trodden path.

 

[Lennholm]

Apple just raised the price of poker. The questions is whether Moto and Google are still willing to play. In any case, never mind Moto, if Google gets involved all this legal exposure won't be good for them and Android, IP-wise. Apple would probably like nothing more than to draw Google in further.

So you're perfectly fine with Apple basically trying to hold Motorola for ransom to get them to back down from a legit case?

Correct. It was just some unsubstantiated claim that was born (and died) on the internet.

Yet, when any unsubstantiated claim that puts an Apple competitor in a bad light is born you're quick to embrace, and then when/if it's proven false you suddenly turn silent

 

[leroypants]

Correct. It was just some unsubstantiated claim that was born (and died) on the internet.

I will give you credit, no matter what the facts are you will defend, worship, adore, and fawn over apple. It's a fact that apple distorted the ratios in order to make the samsung products look more the iPhone and the iPad that they actually are.

http://www.cultofmac.com/109627/app...ainst-samsung-again-this-time-about-galaxy-s/

Even cultofmac admits

Apple’s chalked up some big victories against Samsung in recent weeks, culminating in a preliminary injunction that got the Galaxy Tab 10.1 banned throughout the EU. But did Apple do so based upon false evidence? That’s what one Dutch website is alleging, and we’ve got to admit, their argument’s pretty good.


See the image above? The side-by-side comparison of the iPad 2 and Galaxy Tab 10,1 at the bottom is the exact comparison shot used by Apple to prove in official court documents that the Galaxy Tab 10,1 is “practically identical” to Apple’s tablet.

The only problem? That’s not what the Galaxy Tab 10,1 even looks like. The Galaxy Tab 10,1 has a 1.46 aspect ratio. In Apple’s comparison image, though, has a 1.36 aspect ratio compared to the iPad 2′s 1.30. The tablet’s proper proportions have been deformed.

If you actually look at the image, the Galaxy Tab’s icons are warped too, so this seems like an honest mistake by some paralegal resizing an image.

Even so, though, it raises the question about whether or not the injunction against Samsung should even have been granted. As TechCrunch notes:

The current import ban on the GalTab is entirely related to design, so the court is truly judging these books by their covers. Presenting evidence that falsely represents the appearance of a product — especially when the appearance of the product is the only thing in question — is incredibly suspect to say the least. Let’s add to that the fact that Apple had some serious alone time with the judge when presenting this evidence. Meanwhile, Samsung didn’t even have the opportunity to dispute the image.

 

[cire]

I will give you credit, no matter what the facts are you will defend, worship, adore, and fawn over apple. It's a fact that apple distorted the ratios in order to make the samsung products look more the iPhone and the iPad that they actually are.

It is up to Samsung's attorneys to defend them against whatever Apple does. If they didn't, that is on them and no one else.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It is up to Samsung's attorneys to defend them against whatever Apple does. If they didn't, that is on them and no one else.

Does not change the fact what Apple did was unethical and wrong.

 

[Lennholm]

But it is a forum for Apple enthusiasts. It's like going to an ice cream store and getting mad that it's full of ice cream lovers.

EDIT: I just want to say the word ice cream again.

Enthusiasm is not the same as unconditional loyalty and criticism is not contradictory to enthusiasm.

 

[cire]

Enthusiasm is not the same as unconditional loyalty and criticism is not contradictory to enthusiasm.

No one is asking anyone for unconditional loyalty...and not one "Fanboy" here is unconditionally loyal. There is not one of us that does not have some idea for how Apple products can be better. But we do trust some choices made by Apple...like Flash. All the Windroidsungs said Flash was necessary on a mobile device... now even Adobe doesn't think its necessary on a mobile device.

The problem is that the Windroidsungs take criticism and pummel the entire company and its supporters with it. Makes it hard to listen to you let alone agree with you. Debate your points on the merits, not using ad hominem attacks.

 

[AidenShaw]

All the Windroidsungs said....

What's a "Windroidsung" exactly?

Debate your points on the merits, not using ad hominem attacks.

And isn't using made-up words to describe your opposition a form of ad hominem?

 

[hchung]

I will give you credit, no matter what the facts are you will defend, worship, adore, and fawn over apple. It's a fact that apple distorted the ratios in order to make the samsung products look more the iPhone and the iPad that they actually are.

*snip*

Just curious, what's Samsung have to do with Motorola suing Apple again?

 

[apolloa]

So Motorola has a good case against Apple. They go to court, but Apple demands that Motorola pay them for loss of sales until they win the case? To the tune of over 16 billion!

What a screwed up legal system, what's the point in it all if you get paid even though you can be guilty. A rapist isn't paid for loss of earnings when going through trial?
I can't stand these pathetic legal ramblings, it's almost like they are doing it to make the lawyers have value!

 

[gkpm]

So Motorola has a good case against Apple. They go to court, but Apple demands that Motorola pay them for loss of sales until they win the case? To the tune of over 16 billion!

No one is paying anything to Apple, do you know what a bond is?

 

[apolloa]

No one is paying anything to Apple, do you know what a bond is?

Obviously I don't, please explain.......... in layman's terms......

Never mind, Gnasher explained it:
It's not dirty at all. Your problem is that you don't have a clue how this works and come to the wrong conclusion. Motorola is suing Apple for patent infringement and demands that Apple doesn't start its cloud service in Germany. Apple demands that _if_ Motorola insists that the cloud service isn't started, and a court agrees with the demand, then Motorola has to make sure that they can pay for resulting damages. However, Motorola can just allow Apple to start the cloud service, and then they don't have to show one penny.

So do you think it is Ok if Motorola causes huge damage to Apple's business, loses its court case, and then it turns it they have no money to pay for the damage? It is a very simple situation: _If_ Motorola insists on causing damage to Apple then they have to make sure they can pay for the damage. _If_ Motorola doesn't cause any damage to Apple then they don't have to provide any bond.

So Motorola ONLY pay an obscene amount of money if they loose their case? I'm guessing? I've had enough with them all to be honest, I am going to buy a Sony Tablet S next year I think, if I need a tablet. Then again I know someone who can get them cheap direct from Sony. But I just cannot stand all these bully boy tactics. All the companies are behaving like children but as already said, that's apparently how the patents system works. Was it an American invented system? Certainly has a lot of suing involved?

 

[gkpm]

That's it. The bond is a guarantee that Motorola will have enough money to pay any eventual damage it causes to Apple after those years of litigation.

In other countries you'd just countersue at the end for damages, and then hope the other company would be able to pay it.

Germany has this system to guarantee that the damages are indeed paid, which is good since the amounts at stake would bankrupt most companies.

 

[damir00]

So Motorola ONLY pay an obscene amount of money if they loose their case? I'm guessing?

Still not quite there.

Motorola only pay an obscene amount of money if they use the court system to prevent Apple from continuing business operations -- and then lose the case.

They can continue the case without putting their own money on the line by not gunning for an early injunction.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

What would happen if Motorola could say Apple would need to pay them 16 billion if Apple allowed to sell their products during the same time span and Apple loss

Reason for the 16 billion is those products could never of been sold and as such Apple should of suffered those damages + what ever else in the law suit.

 

[ad2435]

APPL has had a tremendus run.


In 5 years, they are not going to be what/where they are today.

 

[apolloa]

Still not quite there.

Motorola only pay an obscene amount of money if they use the court system to prevent Apple from continuing business operations -- and then lose the case.

They can continue the case without putting their own money on the line by not gunning for an early injunction.

Oh right I see. Hmmm, does make you think is Apple too rich? If no one can afford to take them to court because of the potential costs? Meh like I said I'm fed up with them all. At least it hasn't stopped innovation.. so far...