Motorola Wins Legal Victory Over Apple in Germany, Impact Disputed

[MacRumors]

Late Friday, FOSS Patents reported that Motorola Mobility had won an injunction against Apple in Germany, a decision that could potentially prevent Apple from selling any of its mobile devices in the country. Curiously, the injunction was issued as a default judgment, with Apple apparently deciding not to defend itself for unknown reasons.

The strange circumstances have led to some dispute over whether the injunction will have any impact on Apple's operations in Germany, with The Verge's Nilay Patel arguing that the victory is a "totally symbolic" one for Motorola given that it affects only Apple Inc. and not its Apple Germany subsidiary that actually sells the devices in that country.

Motorola Mobility filed lawsuits against both organizations, and while Apple Germany is vigorously fighting its case, Apple's lawyers let the Apple Inc., lawsuit slide, resulting in this default judgement and injunction. But since Apple Inc., doesn't actually sell anything in Germany, it's a totally symbolic victory for Motorola -- there aren't any products to ban.

Apple itself also took an apparently unconcerned attitude toward the ruling, noting that it fails to impact the company's sales "at this time".

This is a procedural issue that has nothing to do with the merits of the case. This does not affect our ability to sell products or do business in Germany at this time.

Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents vehemently disagrees with Patel's interpretation, noting that there is danger to Apple if courts rule that the parent Apple Inc. company is judged to be an entity selling products in Germany. As one example, Mueller points to the fact that Apple's German website is registered to Apple Inc. and not Apple Germany, meaning that enforcement of the injunction could lead to Apple having to shut down its German website operations. Another example suggests that the injunction could simply prevent Apple Inc. from delivering shipments to Apple Germany, thereby cutting off sales further up the distribution chain without a direct judgment against Apple Germany.

Mueller argues that any restrictions on Apple Inc.'s ability to business in Germany will have an effect on the company's business there, even with actual sales being funneled through the Apple Germany subsidiary. Consequently, he believes that Apple will begin to feel an impact "within weeks" unless Apple wins a suspension of the injunction. In a follow-up post, Mueller notes that a number of German lawyers have indicated that Apple is likely to win such a suspension as the trials continue to play out, but that Apple will need to move quickly to appeal the verdict in order to minimize any impact from it.

All of the lawyers I talked to had consistent positions. In particular, all of them agree with me that the default judgment against Apple Inc. of Cupertino would have very near-term business impact unless Apple wins a suspension. They all agree that in one way or another, Apple's German business also depends on Apple Inc. being unrestricted to do business in Germany. And they all concur that Apple is more likely than not to win a temporary suspension (for the period until a substantive decision following a second hearing by the same court). "More likely than not" is a conservative consensus position. An unnamed one of them told me he can't imagine any other outcome.

As for why Apple allowed the default judgment to be made in Motorola's favor, Mueller puts forward an array of theories, from Apple's lawyers simply missing the court date for some reason to strategic plans to either draw out the case or to preserve the ability to introduce certain new evidence. With so many other cases and investigations relating to Apple's intellectual property disputes, it can be difficult to determine how a move in one case could affect other events, similarly hampering the ability to understand Apple's rationale.

Article Link: Motorola Wins Legal Victory Over Apple in Germany, Impact Disputed

 

[AppleScruff1]

Go Moto!!

 

[Oletros]

In one side a REAL patent lawyer, in the other, a patent "expert".

Mmmm, I think I will side with Nilay Patel

 

[ouimetnick]

So while Moto can ban Apple products in Germany, Apple doesn't actually sell anything to ban....

So whats the thing to be proud about. What an accomplishment..

 

[KPOM]

So far it hasn't affected the stock price, so I'm guessing its impact is minor. We don't really know what Motorola's intended remedy is, either, since they seem to be acknowledging the patents are FRAND.

Still, it seems odd that Apple would let a default judgment pass while fighting an identical case against their other subsidiary. It sounds like either something strategic, or a technical screw up by their lawyers (albeit one easily fixed).

 

[*LTD*]

Curiously, the injunction was issued as a default judgment, with Apple apparently deciding not to defend itself for unknown reasons.

As for why Apple allowed the default judgment to be made in Motorola's favor

-------------------------------------------

That's the key.

There's more to this than what the headline suggests.

Don't forget that the most cagey tech company in court is Apple. Plans within plans within plans.

So while Moto can ban Apple products in Germany, Apple doesn't actually sell anything to ban....

So whats the thing to be proud about. What an accomplishment..

Makes one wonder what Tim Cook et al have up their sleeve. This was planned.

 

[Hellhammer]

Motorola Mobility = Google

Wasn't mentioned in the article, although it's a quite important detail.

 

[Oletros]

Curiously, the injunction was issued as a default judgment, with Apple apparently deciding not to defend itself for unknown reasons.

As for why Apple allowed the default judgment to be made in Motorola's favor

-------------------------------------------

That's the key.

There's more to this than what the headline suggests.

Don't forget that the most cagey tech company in court is Apple. Plans within plans within plans.

I think you only post to joke, it's impossible that you believe the things you write

----------

Motorola Mobility = Google

Wasn't mentioned in the article, although it's a quite important detail.

Mmmm, no, Motorola Mobility is not yet Google and the case started before Google said i will buy it.

 

[*LTD*]

I think you only post to joke, it's impossible that you believe the things you write

I believe it fully.

Just sit back and watch the developments.

 

[samcraig]

Curiously, the injunction was issued as a default judgment, with Apple apparently deciding not to defend itself for unknown reasons.

As for why Apple allowed the default judgment to be made in Motorola's favor

-------------------------------------------

That's the key.

There's more to this than what the headline suggests.

Don't forget that the most cagey tech company in court is Apple. Plans within plans within plans.




Makes one wonder what Tim Cook et al have up their sleeve. This was planned.

Indeed - but also wonder what is up Motorola's sleeve since they brought on the lawsuit knowing Apple doesn't sell there.

It could be to set a precedent.

 

[Oletros]

Indeed - but also wonder what is up Motorola's sleeve since they brought on the lawsuit knowing Apple doesn't sell there.

In the case of Apple because there are plans inside plans inside plans.

in the case of Motorola, because they are incompetents

 

[EnergonCube]

I'm curious as to what would happen if nobody in Germany could purchase Apple products. There's a part of me that WANTS to see a widespread revolt against Motorola. There's nothing like a few angry mobs to get someone's full-blown attention.

 

[krischik]

We don't really know what Motorola's intended remedy is, either, since they seem to be acknowledging the patents are FRAND.

A fair price and reasonable price is still a price. And it seems that Apple did not pay up. So I guess Moto want's the money they are entitled to.

 

[*LTD*]

In the case of Apple because there are plans inside plans inside plans.

in the case of Motorola, because they are incompetents

This is usually how it works. Just look at Samsung's antics.

Their galactic incompetence in this area resulted in injunctions, a half-hearted peace offering that Apple rejected, inexplicable requests for non-existent products that were denied, as well as a hilarious admission of guilt.

From Day 1 Apple has made it their business to turn litigation into a science. Their business model revolves around 1) amassing IP and 2) using the courts to enforce it at every turn. This places them in stark contrast to the practices of 90% of the industry.

Yes, you bet they know exactly what they're doing.

 

[KPOM]

Motorola Mobility = Google

Wasn't mentioned in the article, although it's a quite important detail.

The deal hasn't closed yet. Legally, they can't do Google's bidding quite yet, though I'm sure they won't do anything inconsistent with it. Also, Google needs to tread carefully with Motorola Mobility to avoid antitrust concerns of their own.

 

[samcraig]

This is usually how it works. Just look at Samsung's antics.

Their galactic incompetence in this area resulted in injunctions, a half-hearted peace offering that Apple rejected, inexplicable requests for non-existent products that were denied, as well as a hilarious admission of guilt.

From Day 1 Apple has made it their business to turn litigation into a science. Their business model revolves around 1) amassing IP and 2) using the courts to enforce it at every turn. This places them in stark contrast to the practices of 90% of the industry.

Yes, you bet they know exactly what they're doing.

It's more than that. Apple's DNA was that of Jobs. And Jobs had deep rooted feelings of betrayal since birth, then majorly with Microsoft, then again with Apple's ousting and so on. Core to Apple is the "need" to make sure nothing is ever "stolen" from them ever again. Even if what's being "stolen" isn't theirs.

I don't disagree with it in principle. You should defend your IP as much as you can. I do think that they big players should all sit in a room, hash it out and come to agreements so that courts aren't tied up.

At the end of the day - to the consumer - they mean little anyway. Other than a phone not being available in one country or not - these lawsuits don't really affect the end user. I don't know of a single person that would NOT buy a phone because of any legal issues they heard on the news of one company suing another.

 

[Gasu E.]

Bruce Sewell just received $60M in restricted Apple stock. Obviously, he earned it completely, and therefore it's impossible Apple legal has screwed up.

 

[BLUELION]

Actually, Perhaps you post to joke

In cases like this it seems that the simple explanation is the obvious answer. If you run the risk of being denied the right to present new evidence in a case before a judgement and can salvage this potential scenario by allowing a default judgement...well you let the default judgement stand.

Besides, FRAND patents can't be leveraged in anti-competitive ways as they are "ESSENTIAL" to the technology they represent. Motorola knows this, Apple knows this and hiding in the wing Google knows. this.

Perhaps at the time this original case was filed Moto was leading the charge, but since then Google has acquired Moto and therefore are one and the same.
You can cite that google is not moto, but the reality is that Google now owns Moto, no ands, ifs or buts about that.

As such, you have a fire shot across the bow by google as the beneficiary of the legal action. In this case, the "victory" is nothing more than a showy symbolic one that ultimately will get overturned on appeal with new evidence being presented by Apple and by the EU's determination that FRAND patents can 't be leveraged in the way Moto and Samsung are doing.

I think you only post to joke, it's impossible that you believe the things you write

----------



Mmmm, no, Motorola Mobility is not yet Google and the case started before Google said i will buy it.

 

[Glass!]

Stop validating Florian Mueller by reporting "news" from FOSS patents. He interprets things so they fit his world view and then, when he turns out to be wrong, contrives reasons as to why.

I'd trust the opinion of a random Engadget commenter more than I'd trust anything that was written by Mueller.

 

[Oletros]

As such, you have a fire shot across the bow by google as the beneficiary of the legal action. In this case, the "victory" is nothing more than a showy symbolic one that ultimately will get overturned on appeal with new evidence being presented by Apple and by the EU's determination that FRAND patents can be leveraged in the way Moto and Samsung are doing.

And why ultimately it will be overturned?

 

[kenypowa]

Hi Apple. Thanks for playing with fire. What comes around goes around. Motorola didn't sue you first, neither did HTC or Samsung. A cutting edge smart phone has probably 250,000 patents involved, and I doubt you didn't infringe any one of those.

 

[RalfTheDog]

My guess, this is part of a long strategy. By the end of the game, Google will own Moto and Apple will own Germany.

 

[iCrizzo]

I'm curious as to what would happen if nobody in Germany could purchase Apple products. There's a part of me that WANTS to see a widespread revolt against Motorola. There's nothing like a few angry mobs to get someone's full-blown attention.

Why would you revolt against Motorola? If Apple is violating Moto's patents then Motorola has every right to defend its property. I do not have to agree with what Motorola is doing, but I do respect it the same way I respect Apple for going after other companies that violate Apple's patents.

 

[BLUELION]

yes Olteros

You read that right. overturned.

The rationale is that the injunction was made against Apple Inc. But Apple Inc. does not sell products in Germany.So the injunction is without any real bite.

If the move was strategically done to allow new evidence to be introduced, it makes sense that any judgement can be overturned on appeal especially if the case involving samsung is found to be invalidated due to Samsungs misuse of FRAND patents to limit competition. When that occurs, that will pose as a direct contradiction to the case involving moto as on appeal Apple will cite the samsung case as new evidence that will prompt a reversal of the original injunction.

Think it through dude.

A

And why ultimately it will be overturned?

 

[Oletros]

You read that right. overturned.

The rationale is that the injunction was made against Apple Inc. But Apple Inc. does not sell products in Germany.So the injunction is without any real bite.

If the move was strategically done to allow new evidence to be introduced, it makes sense that any judgement can be overturned on appeal especially if the case involving samsung is found to be invalidated due to Samsungs misuse of FRAND patents to limit competition. When that occurs, that will pose as a direct contradiction to the case involving moto as on appeal Apple will cite the samsung case as new evidence that will prompt a reversal of the original injunction.

Think it through dude.

A

There are a lot of "if's" to say "ultimately it will be overturned". Why is so sure that Samsung case will be invalidated?