I agree that patent laws also differ from jurisdiction. What I meant by the term "precedent" was specific to the Moto case in Germany though. If Moto decides to go to court to enforce the injunction, the judgement that granted the injunction will itself be "precedent" and un-arguable unless Apple appeals the decision.
Well, no. It won't be "precedent," which which means this ruling can be applied to other parties or other contexts. It's simply the judgment of this case. If, for some reason, other issues arise in this case, then it will be the law of the case. But, it will not precedent that can be used outside that case.
I think we agree on it's impact--I guess I'm just taking issue with your use of the word, "precedent."