Motorola request to ban Microsoft products denied by Judge
0. phoneArena 03 Dec 2012, 12:19 posted on
Motorola's request for an injunction on certain Microsoft products was denied by Judge James L. Robart, who made his ruling on Thursday in a case that dates all the way back to 2010; Motorola asserts that Microsoft infringed on patents related to WLAN and video coding...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. MartyK (Posts: 787; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
Wow!, why would motorola seek a ban in the State of Washington, when everyone knows MS have those judge in their pocket (MS HOME-STATE)?.
Where did Samsung and Motorola find these Attorneys?.
2. sprockkets (Posts: 1611; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Because MS brought this case against Moto, not the other way around.
16. Nadr1212 (Posts: 741; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
2 things: why'd Motorola be so Apple-like and if that would happen 4 reals, I'd BAN Motorola products, OH!!!!! What now?!?!?!?!?!?
3. MeoCao (unregistered)
I think the judge is right, standard essential patents should not be used to ban products.
4. sprockkets (Posts: 1611; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Even though MS said themselves that you should be able to?
14. MeoCao (unregistered)
Then MS is wrong
The judge should not do something only b-c some1 says it's right.
7. lyndon420 (Posts: 3987; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
A rectangle with rounded corners should be FRAND...but it isn't.
9. dragonscourgex (Posts: 307; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Honestly it should not be FRAND...there should not be be a patent issued for " rectangle with rounded corners" in the first place.
15. MeoCao (unregistered)
Absolutely agree, this is too broad. A patent should protect an UNIQUE design and must not prevent others from doing obviously reasonable things.
5. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 12031; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Why does Motorola keep trying to abuse FRAND patents?
6. MorePhonesThanNeeded (Posts: 645; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
How about you learn to read before making stupid comments. They simply asked for a ban while the judge was deciding on a RAND rate to levy on MS. Moto is correct is asking for a ban because they MS felt that they shouldn't pay the rate Moto asked for and still used the patents.
You're such a biased individual, every time you see an article that is against Google and it's subs you come running to toss in your skewed and biased rhetoric. Life must be boring where you live isn't it?
8. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Well Apple must be watching this case nervously.
10. joey_sfb (Posts: 5424; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
They will not pay a single cent to their competitors that their motto while aggressively pursuing every bits of legal option available to them.
Apple is a good teacher, just a bit unforturnate that they teach businesses the worst possible practise that every business seems to be picking up lately.Charge more to consumer and handicap the competition is every possible areas.
12. someones4 (Posts: 624; Member since: 16 Sep 2012)
When an American company sues another American company, the judge says: 'guys, we should all be fair to each other.'
When Samsung and Apple clashes, the judge says 'Clearly the Asian company is at fault'.