Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Motorola Wins Legal Victory Over Apple in Germany, Impact Disputed

miggitymac said:
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.
Click to expand...

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."
 
jpthebean said:
Apple is a GIANT company. While it is healthy to question whether they made mistakes, it is absurd to believe that they didn't at least attempt to keep all their metaphorical ducks in a row. Not to mention that infringing on someone else's IP does not suddenly give everyone else the right to infringe on yours. The ultimate outcome of these cases is that EVERYONE will eventually have to pay up, but companies like Motorola and Samsung don't want that to happen. They want to get more than their fair share of compensation while hiding all of their own misdeeds thereby turning rather mundane patent litigation into a very corrupt advantage.
Click to expand...

Right. So we assume that Apple is doing everything right, and assume that Moto, Google, Samsung, and so forth are not, despite lack of evidence? That's the working theory we go with? Just checking.
 
Jbaffoh said:
Way too simplistic and overly broad. You're kinda right, but pretty wrong. Been there, done that, nearly a hundred times, and won every time. I was the in-house general counsel for a multinational for many years, in addition to private practice. I've seen this from all sides.

It's in the details, which you and I don't have in this case. I have a hunch Apple's details were structured just right--and for many reasons.
Click to expand...

It may be simplistic, but it's not wrong. The key is in the condition "if"..."if Apple Inc. is found to have "control" of the German subsidiary". Yes, determining the "if" condition is in the details. Yes, you and I don't have the details. I'm not gonna speculate on how their corporate structure is set up, but you may well be right in your hunch.

I don't know why you insist on calling me wrong when we're saying the same thing. I'm simplifying it and presenting general principles, but that doesn't make me wrong. :confused:

EDIT: You criticize me with bring "way too simplistic and overly broad" then go on to talk about your personal experiences with a multinational corporation, that really are completely irrelevant (no offence), and do nothing to narrow the discussion.

Given that you and I, or anyone on this forum for that matter, don't know the details, wouldn't it be better to talk in broad and general terms? In other words...we have no specifics to work with...why pretend that we know more than we do?
 
Last edited:
Jbaffoh said:
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."
Click to expand...

It will be a precedent decision on subsequent issues involving those specific patents that were considered in the judgement that led to the injunction being granted.

I've clarified what I meant, and you seem to understand what I'm saying. I get that you're getting caught up on my use of the term, but I'm not using it incorrectly as it can be used in more than one way.

We seem to agree on the overall idea. I just don't get why you're so insistent on being right, and me being wrong, when we're saying the same thing.
 
miggitymac said:
I don't know why you insist on calling me wrong when we're saying the same thing. I'm simplifying it and presenting general principles, but that doesn't make me wrong. :confused:
Click to expand...

You're right. Sorry. It's just that the "if" is huge, and most people here don't realize how huge that "if" is. I mistook you for one of them.

I think we agree far more than I initially perceived. Sorry about that.
 
something3153 said:
Maybe that has something to do with the pro-Apple posts assuming that the courts are wrong and Moto is abusing FRAND patents with absolutely zero evidence to support it? Just saying, that might cause some reasonable people to vote down pro-Apple posts.
Click to expand...

And you might be right too, but I bet there is some significantly greater number of Android fans that troll as opposed to zealots projecting their own reality distortion field. Tell me you didn't make a fake account on Palm Developer Central and troll a little yourself! :) It goes both ways unfortunately. If you want to have fun pissing off folks, just go to the Android developer sites and talk about any number of TRUE Android negatives.

BTW, you don't know if Moto is abusing FRAND or not. That is all Motorola Mobility confidential information. You'd be violating an NDA certainly. Give the courts some time and we all will see the true outcome.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
Going after Motorola has a lot more to do with things than just patents. Most of the Nortal patents are going to fall under FRAND as well as they cover key parts of LTE so in terms of weapons those patents are useless as well.


Motorola has a lot of other uses for Google. Do not forget about Google TV and Motorola is the largest supplier of set top boxes and DVRs. These means they already have some major agreements with cable providers already in place which in turn have some agreements with the networks. Do not forget about Google TV.
Click to expand...

Your confusing motorola mobility with motorola. Two seperate companies.
 
miggitymac said:
We seem to agree on the overall idea. I just don't get why you're so insistent on being right, and me being wrong, when we're saying the same thing.
Click to expand...

First, I was adopted....

Seriously, all my friends who read the book say Jobs and I were separated at birth. Our lives parallel in more ways than I can count. I'm not claiming his vision or monetary success, but I do have most of his ******* traits in an uncanny way. I even look like him. So, as a retired lawyer, from a field where being "right" is the purest of product designs, it's instinctual to find "wrong" on silly forums. You're not wrong--I just interpreted it that way.
 
*LTD* said:
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.
Click to expand...

Thanks for helping all of us understand LTD. It's nice to have you here as our resident expert on investing, OS X, Mac Hardware, and Patent Law.
 
Jbaffoh said:
You're right. Sorry. It's just that the "if" is huge, and most people here don't realize how huge that "if" is. I mistook you for one of them.

I think we agree far more than I initially perceived. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...

Jbaffoh said:
First, I was adopted....

Seriously, all my friends who read the book say Jobs and I were separated at birth. Our lives parallel in more ways than I can count. I'm not claiming his vision or monetary success, but I do have most of his ******* traits in an uncanny way. I even look like him. So, as a retired lawyer, from a field where being "right" is the purest of product designs, it's instinctual to find "wrong" on silly forums. You're not wrong--I just interpreted it that way.
Click to expand...

No worries. Glad to have cleared it up.
 
They do not understand the internet

Nobody can keep anybody from buying whatever they want. Except an EMP.
 
blackhand1001 said:
Your confusing motorola mobility with motorola. Two seperate companies.
Click to expand...

umm no I am not. You are confusing the block Google blought and what they own.

Motorola Mobility has the patents, cell phones oh and all set top boxes. I am not exactly sure what the other part of the company was but Google bought the one with cell phone, patents and I know set top boxes.
 
I guess Apple know what they're doing. All this patent litigation is tiring, but I guess this is what goes on at the bleeding edge of technology. I daresay it's going on in other industries, but doesn't get reported on as only Apple seems to have so many people watching out for and reporting on so many of their cases.
 
D4F said:
And did you give it a thought that maybe some people are down voting because they can finally see past Jobs distorted reality field?
Click to expand...

Uh huh. I'm sure that's what it is. :rolleyes:

D4F said:
You don't like people that think different than you and it's all there is to it.
Click to expand...

Baloney.

You know what would be "not liking people that think different than you?" Going to a forum focused on products you don't care for and posting a bunch of trollish nonsense.

D4F said:
Start giving examples with merit/proof or just go and whine somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Read the thread and check the votes, it's all right there for you.

*LTD* can't post the day's weather forecast without the trolls piling on the down votes.

Pathetic.
 
LagunaSol said:
*LTD* can't post the day's weather forecast without the trolls piling on the down votes.

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Defending *LTD* gives you little credit to your entire post. I know plenty of Apple fans here who down rate him because of the stuff that he post quite often can give Apple fans a bad name and post like his are sited as example of the blind following Apple has with little regard to the truth. I can site recent example of him taking an already fanboy article and making it even more so editing key statements, changing head lines ect.

Fanboys no matter the type are worthless. You calling people who think differently a troll kind of shows that you are one.
 
From the article(s), it appears that Apple is contesting one of the patents in the US to be acknowledged under FRAND.

So in effect, this is not about Motorola asking for a license for a friend. This is about Motorola suing Apple for a patent of theirs which is in dispute.

Interesting.
 
LagunaSol said:
*LTD* can't post the day's weather forecast without the trolls piling on the down votes.

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

His posts receive negative responses because of his fanatical, condescending, and know-it-all attitude. Giving negative ratings for that isn't trolling. LTD openly admits to being motivated by negative votes, which in itself is trolling.
 
Apple playing with fire

I just took the time to read the ruling of the Mannheim Court and I have to admit, this could turn VERY ugly fopr Apple inc.

Even though there is a german based Apple GmbH, at least the Apple Store is run by Apple Inc. (it clearly states "Copyright © 2011 Apple Inc" on the german store pages)

So if the ruling states Apple Inc. may not offer any devices which are using the IP this case is about (wireless data communication) and Apple Inc. is running the german Apple Store (store.apple.com/de) it is actualy violating the ruling with every page hit of the store. (invitatio ad offerendum, invite someone to make an offer based on the solicited terms)
Plus for every cae of violating the ruling there is a fine of up to 250,000 €.

What most of the readers seem to miss so far is the second part of the ruling: (A.I.2. and B.I.2.)
Apple Inc. has to disclose ALL shipments/sales dating back to April 19th, 2003
(including billing/shipping information, amount shipped, Prices plus Name and Adress of the Buyer)
But here is the real kicker, (A.I.2.c. and B.I.2.c.) Apple has to disclose how much each product cost and how much profit they made from it (now that is something that can realy be painful)

So if Apple is realy taking this default ruling because of some tactical consideration, it is a real dangerous game to play...
 
PlipPlop said:
No one can stop Android
Click to expand...

You are on the wrong website:)

We know, but we don't care. We love our iphones, ipads, Macs
and so do many former PC users, hence the overwhelming
Apple MacBook sales in a stagnating PC low margin market.

There are more converts from PC's than the other way around.

But if this warms your heart:

Go Android! and thank you for forcing Apple to make the iphone better
and better.

----------

Hey MR,

How about a legal section, so those who are interested can go there straight?

I for one would prefer real Mac news and just find out when this is all done with.

In the very end somebody is getting money, somebody is getting licensing rights and they all will look at their legal bills and realize (but not admit) they could have done that to begin with.
 
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