x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Never mind: Microsoft tells German court it no longer seeks injunction on Motorola RAZR

Never mind: Microsoft tells German court it no longer seeks injunction on Motorola RAZR

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Never mind: Microsoft tells German court it no longer seeks injunction on Motorola RAZR
On Thursday, during an appeals hearing at the Munich Higher Regional Court, Microsoft withdrew a request to have a preliminary injunction placed on the Motorola RAZR. Microsoft alleged that Motorola Mobility had infringed on its European Patent EP1193956 relating to "merging various request methods into a single unified user interface". After two hours of arguments by the Redmond based software stud's lead attorney, Dr. Markus Gampp, the request for the PI was withdrawn. That was the second consecutive time that Motorola Mobility, defended by Dr. Marcus Grosch, escaped a request for a preliminary injunction on one of its devices. A couple of weeks ago, the Mannheim Regional Court ruled in favor of the wholly owned Google subsidiary after Microsoft accused Motorola Mobility of infringing on a patent relating to radio interface.

Thursday's decision by the court was based on its appraisal of Microsoft's likely chances to prevail at trial and the lack of urgency required to get the court to grant the ban. Earlier Motorola phones had contained the same phone number selection method found on the Motorola RAZR and the court failed to buy Microsoft's argument that the Motorola RAZR was more aggressively marketed in the country than those earlier models were.

Motorola RAZR

Motorola RAZR

The whole case seems moot at this point as Motorola Mobility is no longer selling any Android models in Germany. In fact, as we recently pointed out to you, the only handset available on Motorola Mobility's German website is the Motorola Gleam featurephone. That action was taken after Microsoft and Apple won injunctions against Motorola Mobility in Germany and in the states. The preliminary injunctions against Android devices in the U.S. and Germany cannot be enforced since they are related to a technical patent infringement as opposed to a design patent infringement. Both Apple and Microsoft have won permanent injunctions against certain Android models in Germany, which can be appealed, and a U.S. import ban from the ITC.

Next up for the firms involved is a FRAND obligations trial set to begin in Seattle on November 13th while two days later the Munich Higher Regional Court will determine if it can enforce one of the three permanent injunctions Microsoft had won against Motorola Mobility, while the ruling is being appealed. Considering the latter's decision not to currently offer any Android devices in the country, we wonder if the relentless action by Microsoft is the courtroom version of 'piling on'.

source: FOSSPatents

  • Options

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 08:41 21

1. sheik (Posts: 249; Member since: 12 Sep 2012)

Duh, I'm fed up with these patent injunction news...

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 08:45 13

2. No_Nonsense (unregistered)

Too bad, I can't thumb you up more than once.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 10:24 6

8. PhenomFaz (Posts: 1236; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)

its a start...finally some people are beginning to 'let go'...of patents and focussing on innovation

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 08:47 1

3. nobelset (Posts: 270; Member since: 17 Oct 2012)

Steve Ballmer got back together with his wife.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 08:49 6

4. QWIKSTRIKE (Posts: 1288; Member since: 09 Mar 2010)

Certain manufacturer's will do anything to stomp healthy competition out of the way. Microsoft needs to focus on growing their new breath of fresh air WP8 while they have a chance. This petty patent troll war needs to be changed to keep petty things like a rectangle shape from being patented. Vague broad patent request needs to be done away with.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 08:50 5

5. wendygarett (unregistered)

When someone give you a compensation, you should be rational and ethical enough for not banning the victim's product. That's a rules LOL

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 09:10 3

6. sheik (Posts: 249; Member since: 12 Sep 2012)

That rule sucks, If i date that hottie in your user photo and pay a compensation for you as a victim, will you let me to go ahead based on your ethical and rational point of view? Patents matters much more than you think... It take years to develop a new functionality for any OEMs and then they patent it... You cant just copy and pay compensations for BS sake....

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 09:20 1

7. wendygarett (unregistered)

But it's rude to claim compensation and banned victim's product in the same times...

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 11:24 2

11. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

It's the responsibility of an OEM to ensure their devices don't infringe, or to setup royalties for them in advance. Pretty much every phone maker on the planet has to have Nokia and Motorola approve their phones since they use their patented innovations. Granted, many of those are now FRAND (which is silly, companies should be compensated for their true innovations, especially groundbreakers like Moto & Nokia), but there are still a few that require royalties. Nokia could survive (albeit not as a hardware maker) on just royalties, and Google bought Moto just for its patents and royalties.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 10:35 2

9. Stoli89 (Posts: 333; Member since: 28 Jun 2010)

Depends what the compensation is for and what is a stake. If an innovator is granted a patent, it is for the express purpose of PREVENTING OTHERS from using the same idea in the market. It is, in effect, a protection by the government for the innovator to make money from the market for this novel idea and for a LIMITED period. A head start, so to speak.

Another entity has to compensate for the use of that idea in each specific market where it is patented. Of course, the holder of the patent does not have to grant use (at any price) unless the idea is included in specific licensing regimes (ie.e FRAND).

It seems to me that MS and Apple are playing ethically here and by the rules. Just because these actions could impact potential Android consumers has no bearing on the matter.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 10:55 3

10. phitch (Posts: 214; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)

Wrong, the use of patents is not to prevent ideas from the market but to prevent people from using your method of achieving those ideas. That is why software patents are the bane of innovation because the people who preside over these cases often have no idea about software. So they see two ideas that seem to be the same but use very different means to achieve the end result, but since they know nothing of programming languages they ban one because if it looks the same it must be the same!

This is the same problem with everyone who thinks MS and Apple play by the rules, the abuse the jury's lack of knowledge in these cases to often take advantage of something that should never have become patentable in the first place.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 11:36

12. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

Would you then say that software itself shouldn't be patented if it uses an existing software language/code, and only new language/code should be patentable? For me that would make some sense, because it'd be akin to someone patenting an Excel sheet because they filled it out, rather than someone patenting a new program that does what Excel does without using any of its code, theoretically speaking.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 12:25

14. tedkord (Posts: 14124; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

Software should not be patentable period. The coding is already protected by copyright.

Something like "swipe to unlock" is an idea. It shouldn't be patentable. The specific code to achieve it is already protected. Someone can't just take that code and insert it into his own program.

It's like the idea of an operating system. With a software patent, no one else would have been able to design one after the first. The idea of a "layer of programming code that interfaces with a computer system and other software", or some such description would have prevented any other OS. That's just silly.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 11:48 1

13. tuxpower (Posts: 10; Member since: 26 Jul 2012)

FOSSPatents is a paid Microsoft and Oracle shill. Take everything he writes with a large chunk of sodium chloride.

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 15:55 2

15. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

Scared of running an ad in paper and website that google maps didn't violate M$ patents perhaps :D

posted on 19 Oct 2012, 01:38

19. shuaibhere (Posts: 1986; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)

scared of running ad in web and papers that sorry, we violate on google's search patents....

posted on 18 Oct 2012, 22:49

16. amiaq (Posts: 509; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)

Why Microsoft? scare of people hating you like they hate Apple??

posted on 19 Oct 2012, 01:34

17. shuaibhere (Posts: 1986; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)

I know this will happen.....MS is scared of google......
MS is becoming more like apple....
I dunno why all these companies fighting against a single company...
The answer is google supports OPEN SOURCE......

posted on 19 Oct 2012, 12:47

20. chaoticrazor (Posts: 2347; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)

no ones scared of google

so lets get this right, you moan and whine when apple patent everything and sue

then when Microsoft decide to withdraw something other company's should do you claim its because there scared.........so they shouldn't of withdrew then ohh but then you would whine that Microsoft are just evil

and google isnt a special company, all company's are after one thing-money each going after it in a different way

posted on 19 Oct 2012, 01:34

18. shuaibhere (Posts: 1986; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)

I know this will happen.....MS is scared of google......
MS is becoming more like apple....
I dunno why all these companies fighting against a single company...
The answer is google supports OPEN SOURCE......

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories