Motorola wins in Germany against Apple, iCloud features banned, iPhone 4 disappears online

16. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 08:43 3 17

Sniggly i hate to disagree and you know I am not an ifanboy and by no means am i a expert on the law but i feel design more important then essential communication technology. This is because if you inflict on design you are stealing brand identity and its pretty easy to change. However communication technology that moti was suing over like a cell radio is insane its like they don't think an iphone can call now since a moto phone had a radio first. All radios are going to be similar and thats not something to sue over. Thats just how i feel and know i will get thumbed down for seemingly supporting apple which i am really not just making a general claim. To make an anology to cars sying over a radio is like suing over a engine. Thats how i see it. As long as they aren't identical its fair game.

17. Evil_SaNz posted on 03 Feb 2012, 08:59 13 0

So Apple is the only that can use Euclid's forms and sue others if they violate geometrical laws that belong to humanity? If they start to patent Euclid aswell I'm done here on Earth, I go to Mars.

18. ilia1986 posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:04 10 0

biophone - design might be more important - but no single company has a right to patent a rectangle. And that's precisely what Apple did with the iPad. Rectangular form, touch-screen in the center, and black bezels on front. It's kinda hard to design a sleek tablet that doesn't have these. Same for the iPhone. So iOS uses square icons. So Touch-Wiz used those as well. So what.

Apple is just afraid of the competition - and rightfully so.

21. Evil_SaNz posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:28 7 0

Correct. Following Bio's logic Majel Barrett Rodenberry should sue Apple because the first electronic tablet was used by James T Kirk while recording the captain's log in Star Trek and even before the pharaoh Tutankhamun should sue Enterprise's captain because Egyptians had rectangular clay tablets.

• This comment is posted in response to #18 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #18 Hide

24. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:34 0 8

No u assume i agree with broad design patents which isn't so. I think exact copies which exist or intentially trying to steal brand identity can be tried in a cort of law.

• This comment is posted in response to #21 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #21 Hide

62. Forsaken77 posted on 04 Feb 2012, 22:29 0 0

I agree bio. Even though Android supporters won't ever admit this... Samsung blatantly made an EXACT copy of the iPad. The put all the ports and settings in the same exact spots. They made the charging and car charger cables look identical. I love Sammy, I own a GS2, but they did copy Apples's exact design. They tried to clone the iPad to cause confusion among consumers. But copying software is important as well. software is what makes each device unique. Apple tried to take some of Moto's uniqueness away.

• This comment is posted in response to #24 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #24 Hide

19. SuperAndroidEvo posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:14 10 0

How is design more important than the essential communication technology? Without that technology you really don't have a mobile phone.

What good is design if it doesn't do what it's supposed to do?

Other companies are making mobile phones & they are not infringing on Motorola's patents, so why should Apple not be held accountable for their actions? The ITC saw Apple's use of Motorola tech as an infringement, so Apple has to pay the piper now.

Apple tries to say a phone can't be rectangular or have glass on it or they should not have a bezel of the same size. That is crazy because the LG Prada looks like an iPhone before the iPhone ever came out. Meaning that Apple took LG's design. The design Apple is patenting is not even theirs. lol

22. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:32 1 4

I don't agree with most of apple's design lawsuits which your argument is based off. They are far to broad. All that I am saying if a technology is essential for a phone to work you can't blame a company for using it is essential.

• This comment is posted in response to #19 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #19 Hide

28. SuperAndroidEvo posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:51 4 1

Ok I get that, but what I am saying is that other companies are making phones without infringing on Motorola's patents.

Why can't Apple do the same? I bet the same question was asked by the ITC & that is why Motorola was awarded a win against Apple.

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

31. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 09:55 1 4

Well my theory is since apple was being an ass to everyone moto wanted to be an ass back and they don't really care if others infringed. More of a vendeta thing.

• This comment is posted in response to #28 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #28 Hide

34. SuperAndroidEvo posted on 03 Feb 2012, 10:15 1 0

You know you could be right. Kind of an eye for an eye type of thing. You just never know.

Motorola does have a right to protect technology that is used without their permission. Who knows the countless hours, money, & R&D Motorola spent on those technologies just to have Apple make money off their hard work.

The ITC is there to protect companies from such acts.

• This comment is posted in response to #31 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #31 Hide

35. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 10:29 3 0

Well i think maybe apple could pay a royality to make up for the r&d. Since they were being an ass i don 't really feel bad they were banned. They deserved it for trying to ban others. Not for the actual breach of patent.

• This comment is posted in response to #34 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #34 Hide

40. TKFox007 posted on 03 Feb 2012, 11:26 2 0

I wouldn't say vendetta, I'd say it's more like giving them a taste of their own medicine.

Because Apple has been really sue happy in trying to eliminate the competition

• This comment is posted in response to #31 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #31 Hide

41. biophone posted on 03 Feb 2012, 11:34 2 0

Thats probably a better term thanks.

• This comment is posted in response to #40 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #40 Hide

59. remixfa posted on 04 Feb 2012, 12:26 0 0

Apple has been slinging mud based on the most vague terms of "copywrite infringements" to try to scare people into submission. Older companies like Moto, Nokia, and Samsung have actual patents that they can use to slap Apple down.

It was more a testament to Apple's arrogance and ignorance that they tried to play bully, when the real school yard bullies have been playing nice with each other for years. Since Apple has gone after all of them (except nokia, who already has apple on a leash from previous apple patent stealing), its only right that they stand up and slap apple down.

Apple - "ooh look, i have a napkin drawing of a square, and im going to sue you over it!!"

Moto/Samsung - " ooh look, i have an actual patent for the 3g/ radio technology that your using without paying for, keep it up and ill tear you down."

apple didnt listen, now they get smacked.

And yes, that sets off a dangerous precident, but one that I feel is ultimately needed to bring Apple back in line and to the bargaining table. Apple wont stop its mass lawsuits over nothing until its brought to its knees in counter lawsuits. Rulings like this are the begining of Apple feeling the sting of its own ignorance. A few more rulings like this and we might see apple decide to play nice and make deals instead of shut companies down.

• This comment is posted in response to #41 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #41 Hide