The other day I got downvoted into oblivion for saying that if Apple had had the "night mode" in their eBook reader first, they'd be suing everyone else who implemented white-on-black. They get it last, though, and it's obvious and not innovative.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Motorola Wins Preliminary Injunction, Could Bar Sales of iPhone and 3G iPad in Europe [Updated x2]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The other day I got downvoted into oblivion for saying that if Apple had had the "night mode" in their eBook reader first, they'd be suing everyone else who implemented white-on-black. They get it last, though, and it's obvious and not innovative.
Very interesting that no one is commenting on this. Apple basically transfered control of some patents to a Patent troll company. It used a shell company to do so. And now the patent troll is suing every mobile phone player but Apple.
It's sad how Apple is becoming such a litigious entity.
Very interesting that no one is commenting on this. Apple basically transfered control of some patents to a Patent troll company. It used a shell company to do so. And now the patent troll is suing every mobile phone player but Apple.
I'm actually not too surprised that there haven't been any comments. It makes Apple look bad, and we know how many here don't like facts that don't reflect well on Apple. I posted the story and link in the Apple and Industry forum and it's gotten over 300 views without a comment! I was expecting someone to rush to Apple's side and claim what a brilliant move it was. Not that I was expecting anyone in particular to do that.
McDonalds has sued Burger King multiple times. It would be pretty accurate to classify some of that as "look and feel" type suing.
Sometimes I feel like going Windows and Android (already did).I'm actually not too surprised that there haven't been any comments. It makes Apple look bad, and we know how many here don't like facts that don't reflect well on Apple. I posted the story and link in the Apple and Industry forum and it's gotten over 300 views without a comment! I was expecting someone to rush to Apple's side and claim what a brilliant move it was. Not that I was expecting anyone in particular to do that.
I'm disappointed with Apple.
Though these lawsuits do not affect the consumer, but why I should give my money to someone that is hell-bent on curtailing competition?
Last edited:
Yeah, but it sorta stops them from being sold. Meaning that hardly anyone there will have one.
A few years ago i would have felt sorry for Apple with this happening. However judging from their recent actions its hard to give them any sympathy. Schadenfreude
Last edited:
maybe it has to do with apple spying all the time, remote device control, unique id, locations, camera remote apps
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)
Love the comment!
The iPad 3 now with "wings".... But I guess they already did that with the smart cover!
slattery69 said:
Love the comment!
The iPad 3 now with "wings".... But I guess they already did that with the smart cover!
So even if Motorola was attempting to use FRAND patents improperly, Apple should just "play by the rules"? It seems to me that they did want to play by the rules, but that Motorola Mobility might have been trying to bully them and use FRAND patents to try to threaten a potential competitor.
Regarding the "patent trolling" we don't really know all the facts. It sounds like perhaps Apple settled other disputes with them by handing over a few of theirs.
----------
Companies generally don't like competition. The whole idea of patents and copyrights are to prevent others from using ideas that you thought of without your permission. In the technology arena, lawsuits happen all the time since just about anything new involves use of someone's existing patents. Apple lawsuits get higher profile simply because of who Apple is. I doubt that they really sue more than any other company in a similar position.
Remember, the main reason Google bought Motorola Mobility was for the patent portfolio. Do you think they plan to just sit on that portfolio? Surely they will use it to try either to seek royalties from others or block competing products.
You're making up a scenario that didn't happen.
Motorola won the injunction in this case because they did everything "by the rules" and Apple did not.
That's exactly backwards, according to the court decision and related info. Here's the gist of what happened:
1) Motorola started talking to Apple in 2007 about paying royalties. Apple kept putting them off.
2) Motorola finally said Apple had to pay up and offered FRAND terms at a current rate, and I think also wanted back royalties of course at the going rate years ago..
3) Apple responded by saying they'd accept the current terms as long as they also could keep the right to try to invalidate the related patents... in other words, to try to get out of paying higher past due amounts.
That brings us up to now, and the court has sided with Motorola, because:
- Apple never made a commitment to accept the current Fair and ND terms that were offered.
- Apple wanted to try to wiggle out of past payments, or at least lower them, which meant they wanted to pay less than anyone else. That wouldn't be fair to either Motorola or the other licensees.
Most people think that Google got the patents for defense, not offense as Apple is using theirs for.
Wow the blind hate is strong with this one.
Google bought them for defense. Not to attack.
Also Google bought Moto for the set top box market to help push Google TV. Guess who the worlds largest supplier of set top boxes. Give you a hint it is the same company Google bought (Motorola Mobility).
I can also see them using Motorola to help push the other companies to role out updates faster to their phones.
The big difference being is, that joke is now old and forgotten, the iPad name now being as iconic as "iPod."
Forgotten for 27 days of the month, otherwise for some it's very real for the other few day.
I remember when everyone made fun of the Wii. It was a stupid name then, and it's a stupid name now. But we're all used to it. I think you could say the same thing about the iPad.
Or maybe because it ended up being such a paradigm shifting innovative synergistic life altering machine that changed the way we think forever because it was such a magical experience, we all realized we had a new golden calf to fawn over, and felt foolish for making fun of something so utterly profound over something so trite as a name.
And the iPad is pretty alright, too.