Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Iphone Patents The Courts Apple

Google Seeks US Ban On iPhones, iPads, Macs 404

Posted by timothy
from the ask-big-then-compromise dept.
theodp writes "Following up on an announcement that it would rid itself of 4,000 employees world-wide and renege on a deal with the State of Illinois, Google's Motorola Mobility unit said it has filed a new patent-infringement case against Apple, which seeks a ban on U.S. imports of devices including the iPhone, iPad and Mac computers. 'Apple's unwillingness to work out a license leaves us little choice but to defend ourselves and our engineers' innovations,' Motorola Mobility said in an e-mailed statement."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Seeks US Ban On iPhones, iPads, Macs

Comments Filter:
  • Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18, 2012 @07:01AM (#41034859)

    Why not ban the two companies from doing business in the US until they iron out a deal?

  • by Targon (17348) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @07:25AM (#41034951)

    I can see Microsoft and others going with Google as well in this case, since hurting Apple would help EVERYONE. Apple is like the Chinese government in trying to control all the people within its sphere of control and force them to do things the way it wants. The "you MUST go through the iTunes store and pay us 30 percent" crap should really be investigated by the various government departments for violations of the law.

  • Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JackieBrown (987087) <dbroome@gmail.com> on Saturday August 18, 2012 @07:26AM (#41034957)

    It's possible that the goal of this is to force patent reform.

    Now we will see how well MAD works when someone stops bluffing

  • by Snowhare (263311) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @07:30AM (#41034959) Homepage

    Yep. This is Google explaining to Apple that they aren't the only one with patents. The monster patent portfolios of all the big players have exist in part to deter other large players from launching patent wars. It is a form of 'Mutually Assured Destruction'. Apple went nuclear starting a couple of years ago. Google (and other large players) are now launching their counter-strikes to demonstrate to Apple why it is a bad idea.

    If Apple has any sense (more likely now that Steve Jobs is gone) they will begin quietly trying to wind down the patent wars.

  • by dell623 (2021586) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @07:36AM (#41034979)

    "seven Motorola Mobility patents on features including location reminders, e-mail notification and phone/video players" -- doesn't sound very standards essential to me.

    Maybe the thought of not being able to buy iPads and iPhones will wake up the U.S. to how badly screwed up the patent system is? Or maybe that thought will stop ITC from treating the case the same way it has treated cases against MotoGoogle.

    The gloves are really off, the floodgates are open, the fat is on the fire etc. Although Google inherited cases from Motorola, this is the first time Google has directly sued Apple. Google has been reticent to take on Apple directly but they don't have much choice left now.

    Interestingly, probably the sole patent victory for any Android manufacturer has been the ban on push e-mail from iCloud on Apple devices won by MotoGoogle, which still exists: http://www.tuaw.com/2012/04/13/apple-still-blocked-from-using-push-email-in-germany/ [tuaw.com]

    It is possible that a similar patent is among those involved here. Maybe the Motorola purchase wasn't as useless as Florian Muller makes it out to be...

  • Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18, 2012 @08:01AM (#41035085)

    Nothing in the linked article supports the claim in the summary that they "renege[d] on a deal with the State of Illinois". All the article says is that their workforce will drop below 2500 and that consequently they will no longer be eligible for tax breaks. Nowhere does it suggest that they made any deal requiring them to retain a workforce above that level. If there is a link supporting the claim that they reneged on a deal in this matter then can someone provide it?

  • by teg (97890) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @08:30AM (#41035211) Homepage

    Apple and Microsoft don't fight. They already have cross licensing deals in place. I've always wondered why Apple didn't take it's cash pile and discount macbooks to put a big dent into PC sales.

    Because Apple want to earn money doing so - they keep increasing their market share already, and they want to keep their brand identity - premium products at a premium price, with industry leading design. They don't want to become another Dell.

  • by gl4ss (559668) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @08:34AM (#41035239) Homepage Journal

    ... it's offense.

    well, would be if apple hadn't tried to block nexus sales...

  • Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by guises (2423402) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @08:34AM (#41035247)

    Now we will see how well MAD works when someone stops bluffing

    You can't use future tense here - companies are already suing each other like crazy. Apple / Samsung; Microsoft / Android phone makers; patent trolls / everybody. We know exactly how well MAD works: poorly.

  • Re:How can this be ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by elashish14 (1302231) <profcalc4@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Saturday August 18, 2012 @09:15AM (#41035505)

    My memory is fuzzy, and I'm too lazy to research this myself, but my understanding is that part of the deal in the US (and probably other nations) that allowed the acquisition to go through was that Google would not aggressively attack others with the IP that they acquired from the deal.

    Is this not the case? And if it is, wouldn't these actions be in violation of that agreement? Could Google face some sort of kickback for breaching this agreement, or possibly even an antitrust case?

  • Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Karzz1 (306015) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @09:52AM (#41035745) Homepage
    I am not sure I see your point. A $40 phone is not competing with a $700 phone; this is probably why there was a percentage based charge issued and not a flat fee.

    Either way, Apple has been aware of their obligation all along and has chosen to avoid paying. Also worth mentioning is that Apples counter suit was thrown out with prejudice.

    While I believe our patent system is FUBAR, as it stands Apple appears to be in the wrong here.
  • by ArchieBunker (132337) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @10:18AM (#41035901) Homepage

    He sued the mac rumors website for talking about rumors for upcoming products. I believe it was over the G4 toaster design,

  • Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jbolden (176878) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @10:46AM (#41036137) Homepage

    If someone sells a $1000 laptop with a cell phone in it, should Motorola get a full percentage of that, too?
    One would hope the contract language would specify this, but doesn't sound like it.

    Motorola's position and I believe they are right is that the The FRAND license would entitle Apple to the same terms as anyone else selling a $1000 laptop with a phone in it gets. Which is no one and so Motorola can charge what they want (up to 2.5% of $1000). Apple's position is that Motorola must patent at 2.5% of the $40 phone and the fact that the phone is only sold conjoined with a laptop is irrelevant.

    IMHO FRAND is not quite a broad as Apple thinks it is.

  • Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) <almafuerte.gmail@com> on Saturday August 18, 2012 @11:23AM (#41036397)

    Except it's totally not the same situation. Apple has been attacking every single android manufacturer plus google itself for a very long time. This is retaliation. Somebody HAS to deal with apple. I'm not an idiot, I don't fantasize about how good and altruistic google is. It's a corporation, and it defends its interests, sure. But this move can't be considered a cold-blooded attack, it's self-defense against a patent troll who openly stated their intentions to use their every resource to destroy android.

  • Re:How can this be ? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by romanval (556418) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @11:59AM (#41036677)
    From what I read: Apple's is using a Qualcomm communication chip in their devices. Qualcomm has already paid into the FRAND license pool (which is built into the price of their chips). That license is then extended to the customers that buy Qualcomm's chips. Since Apple (among many other companies) is Qualcomm's customer, the FRAND license is already covered.

    Motorola going back and suddenly demanding 2.5% for iPhones using their FRAND looks like double dipping. If they get any kind of settlement, you will quickly see MM going after ANYBODY that uses communication chips based on their FRAND technology -- including Windows Phones, all other (non Motorola) Android phones, dumb phones, etc. Lawyers tend to keep doing what they do so long as money is involved.
  • It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kelemvor4 (1980226) on Saturday August 18, 2012 @12:39PM (#41037041)
    Apple has repeatedly refused to license the patents and instead continues to just use them without paying. Was anyone actually surprised to see this happen? The word inevitable comes to mind. Not that I am particularly in love with the patent system, but Apple enjoys suing everyone else for patent violations and then they turn around and blatantly do it themselves. Someone at apple has been taking their stupid pills on the reg.

Swap read error. You lose your mind.

Working...