Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
EU Apple

Apple Files Suit Against Motorola Xoom In EU 181

Posted by samzenpus
from the when-in-doubt-sue dept.
CWmike writes "Apple isn't just going after the Samsung Galaxy Tab in Europe, it's also attacking the Motorola Xoom. Apple's lawsuit, which was filed in Germany and led to Tuesday's injunction barring sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, makes reference to a separate complaint against the Motorola Xoom. Patent expert Florian Mueller, who told Computerworld on Tuesday that the mounting patent cases could cast a cloud over Android licensing, found the original lawsuit, filed in Dusseldorf, Germany, and pointed out the Motorola action. The reference in the suit says that Apple has also filed a complaint over the design of the Motorola Xoom, which runs the Android operating system. But it's unclear if Apple is seeking an injunction that would immediately prevent Motorola from importing the tablets into Europe."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Files Suit Against Motorola Xoom In EU

Comments Filter:
  • by sunr2007 (2309530) on Thursday August 11, 2011 @04:44AM (#37053576)
    He never confirms or deny (reveal)that that the blog is funded by apple and microsoft to create about FUD about Android . Double Agent Florian Mueller.
  • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday August 11, 2011 @04:46AM (#37053590) Journal

    Motorola has thousands of patents going right back through this

    No they don't. Any patents from then will have expired in the '90s. They will, however, have a lot of patents from the '90s that may still be relevant now...

  • Prior art design (Score:5, Informative)

    by zebslash (1107957) on Thursday August 11, 2011 @05:10AM (#37053680)

    Samsung is now showing to a court in Netherland 20 cases of prior art in tablets, such as this one from 1994: the Knight Rider http://rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2011/04/tablet-computers-as-seen-from-1994.html [rossdawsonblog.com] As seen on these videos, this looked exactlty like an iPad! You may follow the courtroom debates thanks to Andreas Udo de Haes https://twitter.com/#!/andreasudo [twitter.com] and on OsNews: http://www.osnews.com/ [osnews.com]

  • by worf_mo (193770) on Thursday August 11, 2011 @06:32AM (#37054064)

    Reminds me of a blog post [wordpress.com] by Sun's Jonathan I. Schwartz:

    In 2003, after I unveiled a prototype Linux desktop called Project Looking Glass*, Steve called my office to let me know the graphical effects were “stepping all over Apple’s IP.” [...] If we moved forward to commercialize it, “I’ll just sue you.”

    My response was simple. “Steve, I was just watching your last presentation, and Keynote looks identical to Concurrence – do you own that IP?” Concurrence was a presentation product built by Lighthouse Design, a company I’d help to found and which Sun acquired in 1996. Lighthouse built applications for NeXTSTEP, the Unix based operating system whose core would become the foundation for all Mac products after Apple acquired NeXT in 1996. Steve had used Concurrence for years, and as Apple built their own presentation tool, it was obvious where they’d found inspiration. “And last I checked, MacOS is now built on Unix. I think Sun has a few OS patents, too.” Steve was silent.

    And that was the last I heard on the topic.

    And further down:

    I understand the value of patents – offensively and, more importantly, for defensive purposes. Sun had a treasure trove of some of the internet’s most valuable patents [...] so no one in the technology industry could come after us without fearing an expensive counter assault. And there’s no defense like an obvious offense.

    But for a technology company, going on offense with software patents seems like an act of desperation, relying on the courts instead of the marketplace. See Nokia’s suit against Apple for a parallel example of frivolous litigation – it hasn’t slowed iPhone momentum (I’d argue it accelerated it). So I wonder who will be first to claim Apple’s iPad is stepping on their IP perhaps those that own the carcass of the tablet computing pioneer Go Corp.? Except that would be AT&T. Hm.

  • by gnasher719 (869701) on Thursday August 11, 2011 @07:01AM (#37054334)

    He never confirms or deny (reveal)that that the blog is funded by apple and microsoft to create about FUD about Android . Double Agent Florian Mueller.

    If you keep track of what he does, he is clearly paid by Microsoft. Google is enemy number one. Apple, Linux, IBM are secondary enemies. In a case like this where a secondary enemy sues a primary enemy, he sides with the secondary enemy, but he will and has attacked Apple, Linux and IBM as well. And usually, as seen here, gives nonsense arguments. The case Apple vs. Samsung and now Apple vs. Motorola has nothing to do with Google at all; it only has to do with the shape and looks of the Samsung and Xoom devices and packaging over which Google has no control or influence.

  • by tomhudson (43916) < ... <nosduh.arabrab>> on Thursday August 11, 2011 @09:21AM (#37056088) Journal
    Florian Mueller is not a patent expert. Additionally, he's generated a lot of FUD by giving the misleading impression that he's a lawyer when he's not. The guy is a paid shill. Ranks right down there with Darl McBride and SCO.

If you're not careful, you're going to catch something.