Apple seeks to re-instate patent infringement claim against Motorola Mobility
Motorola Mobility had previously been able to convince the ITC that one of Apple's patents was invalid and that the other one had not been infringed on. The ITC rulings covered transparent screens that can handle multiple touches in different locations, that allow people to use a mobile phone by swiping or touching the screen. ITC lawyer Megan Valentine, defending the ITC's ruling, said that Sony had an earlier patent for touchscreen technology called SmartSkin. Valentine said that the algorithms in Apple's patent and Sony's patent were "nearly identical," and she said that the ITC did the right thing in finding that the commercial success of the Apple iPhone did not mean that Apple's patent was unique. Motorola described Apple's description of how it came up with its invention as "equal parts fiction, hyperbole, and litigation-inspired hindsight," and added that the parts for the iPhone existed before Apple came up with its smartphone, and that Apple borrowed heavily from others to develop the phone.
Motorola DROID, Motorola DROID 2, Motorola DROID X, Motorola CLIQ, Motorola DEVOUR, Motorola CHARM and the Motorola XOOM tablet.
Motorola and Apple have faced each other in court in Florida and Wisconsin. On March 1st, both sides said that they will meet in an informal settlement negotiation at least once before a May 31st deadline for mediation. The Wisconsin cases were tossed by two different judges and are on appeal. Additionally, the ITC is set to make a decision on April 22nd on whether Apple infringed a Motorola Mobility patent for a proximity sensor that lets a phone now how close it is to a user's body so that it doesn't accidentally dial a number or make a call. If the ITC rules in favor of Motorola in this case, it could impose a sales ban on Apple products.
6. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
"And why I'm not surprised..."
Cuz your an android fanboy
7. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4601; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
If i don't like Apple as a company that doesn't mean that I'm fan boy of something. ;)
And I'm not surprised because it is typical Apple's move.
18. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
"If i don't like Apple as a company that doesn't mean that I'm fan boy of something. ;)"
Yes it does
30. lyndon420 (Posts: 1641; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
I don't like liver, but I like blue. Is that what you mean dark?
41. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
That might be the dumbest thing I've heard you say. I don't like Ford, as I've owned one and it gave me nothing but trouble. So I refuse to own one, but besides that I've owned Chevy, Olds, Pontiac, Dodge, and almost went for a Honda. Just because I don't care for Ford doesn't mean I am a fan for one of those other makers, it just means I'm not a fan of Ford.
The same can be true in the mobile industry as well. You don't have to like one thing because you dislike something else.
46. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
He says a lot of dumb things, and I mean A LOT.
51. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
No... I just don't say the things you wanna hear. I'm not stuck in this stupid little PA fanboy war like you are, I exist in the real world of work, gym, and taking care if my fiancé and son. I will never dislike someone due to the device they use, or hate a company for being greedier, when they all are. I don't give a flying expletive what apple google moto Samsung, or for that matter Pepsi or ford do. Sell me the device I want, and that's it. Your defense of android, google, Samsung, and moto hasn't resulted in you getting so much as a dime from them has it. You rant and rave about your hatred of apple, but when have you manned up and took it to apple HQ? I'd say never... Why because all you are is a consumer, who does nothing more than sit on the couch with your Internet capable device, and complain, cry, and whine about this multi billion dollar company that knows what's its doing. You don't sit on any of these companies boards, or hold the Chair. You don't know what's going on behind closed doors anymore than I do. The difference is I know I'm a consumer, and you act like so much more. Get a grip, get a life, and grow the hell up Mr Taters and Co. Apple should sue who they feel they have the right to sue, and whoever feels they have the right to sue apple should do the same. Now go buy your gs4 when it launches...CONSUMER!!!
52. tedkord (Posts: 3932; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Here's the problem: Apple doesn't want me to be able to buy the device I want. They want to stifle the competition with lawsuit after lawsuit. With their cash stockpile, even if they ultimately lose the cases, they do damage to the competitors.
HTC was forced to cowtow, because the litigation was to expensive. Apple knows they can out wait anyone in the courtroom, except maybe Samsung.
I don't hate anyone for the device they choose. Right now, I do hate Apple for their underhanded tactics and arrogance, and their desire to dictate to me what devices I can use. That does not make me a fanboy of any other company. Right now, Android makes the best devices for me. I had hoped to be on WebOS by now, but Palm and HP totally bungled that. I was excited to see what WP would offer, until I actually saw it.
Unfortunately, right now, Samsung is the only company making what I want: top of the line processing power, big HD screen, removable battery and expandable storage, and unlocked bootloaders. They're also about the best at getting the source code out to the community.
54. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Ted I do not support apples stifling the competition, and love Samsungs products. I support people buying what they want be it apple, Sammy etc. As I've said before, apple has questionable business practices that I simply do not like. However my dislike of a company's business dealings shall never trickle down to those who use that company's products. Sorry bro, but I just don't agree with Richards take on dissing apple users.
57. donfem (Posts: 480; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
I guess english is hard for his comprehension..:)
14. networkdood (Posts: 5538; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Dark, no, we are not surprised because Apple will repeatedly battle in court, even after a loss...dragging arse
20. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Bro I know apple does some shady stuff. It's just funny as hell watching people like Richard get soooo mad that he doesn't even like the people who use iPhones. What if his mom, or dad used it? Would he then stop liking his parents? I wonder why he gets so mad at an inanimate object that only connects people, or at a company that he had nothing to do with.
22. Paximos (Posts: 47; Member since: 26 Jul 2012)
I wonder what you "have to do" with apple....(not biased toward a platform)
40. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
I have a few family members that use it, and it's totally fine with me as it was easier for them to use than my android phone was.
This has more to do with Apple using litigation to set the playing field of the mobile industry. So far the companies Apple has gone after the hardest were the ones who were, at the time, the biggest android vendor. Early on that was HTC, then Samsung. This lawsuit came when Moto & Google were coming together. Apple wants to keep it's boot on the neck of it's closest competitor, and try and make them tap out.
The thing I think you're missing here is the patent in question isn't even theirs, it's Sony's. Thy go through this whole deal and sue someone for tech that isn't even theirs to begin with.
And here I though that Tim Cook hated litigation. I know people have mentioned this before and were told that once the ball was rolling you couldn't stop it. But in this case they're reviving a case that was decided already. So going by this, don't expect the lawsuits to stop until A. Android no longer exists, or B. Apple goes bankrupt. Just something to look forward to.
42. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Now your post makes sense, and I certainly hope apple doesn't get that wish. I just can't see myself disliking people cause they use an iPhone, or Mac. That's just silly to me...
55. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Me neither. If it works for you great, if it doesnt, find something else. What p***es me off is people rooting one way or another for one company to dominate and take away people's choice, or telling or that the only reason I don't like something or someone is because I'm a fanboys or I can't afford it. That was the point of my first post. A person can dislike something without being a fanboy for it's rivals. A person doesn't have to be on one side or the other, just like you proclaim to be. So if you can be without loyalty to any of these companies, why can't anyone else? I have tried all of the OSs available in my area to one extent or another, and currently android suits my needs. When that changes, so will my OS of choice. I just want to ensure there are more than one choice in the future. I don't have to march on any companies' headquarters to effect change. Instead I can try to give people another point of view. More information is never a bad thing when making a decision. If enough people make their feelings known, either through social media or with their wallets, it can force companies to rethink their actions. But as long as new information is brought to the forefront, and generate discussion, it's never a bad thing. And if that discussion can effect a positive change, even better.
43. Droiddoes (unregistered)
It's "you're", not your, which implies possession.
As a fellow Grammar Nazi you should know that.
49. darkkjedii (Posts: 9290; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Now you're post would imply "now you are post". C'mon man. It's his post, which implies possession.
3. Droiddoes (unregistered)
Of course they do. I'm OK with it though, the more time they spend with this BS the more their stock plummets.
I for one support apples policy of not making new products.
17. networkdood (Posts: 5538; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
You know, that is an interesting take on the subject...I like it
4. _Bone_ (Posts: 2061; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)
Apple still doesn't get that "no such thing as bad press" doesn't work for them, self-claimed high-end original gadget makers, people are raising eyebrows and sales underwhelm. It works for rivals playing catch-up however because it gives them attention previously only Apple could get, see Samsung's increasing sales upon the 1Bil verdict. Motorola could do with some free press too, and looks like they'll get it.
Thank you Apple I guess.
5. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 5645; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
Damn apple wtfs uing a three year old phone. Com on enough of this shyt already
44. Droiddoes (unregistered)
In Fairness, that 3 year old Droid X is highly comparable to or even better than any of the novelties apple has shat out in the last three years. They're basically admitting a 3 year old phone outclasses their crap XD
10. dragonscourgex (Posts: 307; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Dude, if Apple would put this much effort into updating iOS, they would not have to take to the court system to compete against everyone.
11. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
Apple and Nokia need to die. Hopefully Motorola can get a sales ban on them so they think twice about encouraging this crap.
24. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Where did Nokia come in on this?!?!?
Sure, they're "friends of the court" in a different case, but Nokia is not allied or supportive of apple (except the royalties they get from them for their many infringements on Nokia innovations)
47. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
They encourage the idea that Apple should be allowed to impose a sales ban because of prior art patents. I don't know how even Nokia fan boys can support that.
13. procopiojose (Posts: 132; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)
stfu apple... go back to your room.. now!!
23. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Oh for goodness sake apple.
All in favor of apple getting a universal lawsuit initiation restriction & court banishment for at least one year, show me your green thumbs.
35. lyndon420 (Posts: 1641; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
They need to be 6 feet under is more like it.
25. dorianb (Posts: 333; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Why would you want a ban on devices that aren't even technologically viable, not sold, in a landfill, still on 3G, used as paperweights?
Waste that 30 billion or what ever in cash on a device that's still sold or relevant.
-sent from my Motorola HD MAXX
28. vickygamit (Posts: 29; Member since: 16 Aug 2012)
sony don't have any problem! what is happening to apple?
29. tedkord (Posts: 3932; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
But I thought Timmy didn't like lawsuits.
32. ideal_josh (Posts: 26; Member since: 26 Nov 2012)
That's not true, its just to make him look good
34. roscuthiii (Posts: 1717; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
"When you're betting on stupidity, you may as well go all-in."
38. MartyK (Posts: 669; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
Samsung Atty's this is what you say:
"Parts for the iPhone existed before Apple came up with its smartphone, and that Apple borrowed heavily from others to develop the phone". per ITC Lawyer Megan Valentine
The BEST statement of the year!!
39. jroc74 (Posts: 3980; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I might try to get a replacement for my broke Droid X 1 now....just because.....
I'm curious what the key invention was that drove the iPhone phenenom....since the LG Prada was available in Feb 2006... Invention....thats a pretty big claim Apple.
48. rusticguy (Posts: 2811; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Apple stocks to head below 300 mark soon :)
53. drnggaj33 (Posts: 127; Member since: 29 Feb 2012)
apple just making them self look bad even more alot apple fans are starting to see it and kinda of tired of it