Apple scores major patent win over Android: German court issues injunction against Google’s Motorola Mobility

“After the billion-dollar California verdict against Samsung, and one day after the launch of the iPhone 5, Apple just dealt Google and its Android ecosystem the next significant blow,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents.

“At the Munich I Regional Court, Presiding Judge Dr. Peter Guntz announced his panel’s decision, which had been pushed back by five weeks, on an Apple v. Motorola Mobility lawsuit over the “overscroll bounce”, or “rubber-banding”, patent,” Mueller reports. “The accused Motorola Mobility tablets and smartphones were all found to infringe EP2126678 on “list scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display”, the European equivalent of U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381.”

Mueller reports, “Apple can enforce a Germany-wide permanent (but appealable and, therefore, preliminarily-enforceable) injunction now by posting a 25 million bond (or making a deposit of the same amount), which it undoubtedly will. Motorola doesn’t have to look far for a workaround: stock Android (the version of Android that Google makes available for download) comes with a glow effect instead of the overscroll bounce. Samsung’s current devices also have a blue glow. But the glow does not solve the problem that the rubber-banding patent solves: by the time a user notices the glow, he or she has already instinctively pressed harder because of the impression that the device is not responding. This injunction spells further degradation of the Android user experience.”

MacDailyNews Take: Let’s be perfectly clear here: It’s only “degradation” because of those companies who decided to overstep legal bounds and deploy Apple’s intellectual property in their products. It’s their fault the Android settlers’ experience is “degraded,” not Apple’s. It’s what Android would’ve been had Samsung, Motorola Mobility et al. not decided to break the law for profit by infringing upon Apple’s patented intellectual property.

Mueller reports, “If Apple posts another 10 million euros, it can also obligate Motorola to destroy any infringing material, and for yet another 10 million euros it can get a recall. Furthermore, Motorola was held to owe Apple damages for past infringement. But Google will definitely appeal the decision to the Munich Higher Regional Court, and additionally it will keep pursuing its opposition to the grant of this patent by the European Patent Office… Android has far bigger patent infringement problems than any piece of computer software has ever had in the history of the industry, and this has many of Google’s hardware partners profoundly concerned… There can be no confusion about the fact that Google is losing the smartphone patent war in the United States and in Europe.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Please let the sweet justice keep flowing!

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Florian Mueller” for the heads up.]


    1. What do you like to see? Irrelevant verdicts and decisions? This means nothing until it passes the challenge of the highest Court in the land in any jurisdiction. This said, no doubt that it gets Google thinking about buying RIM and the accompanying OS and move on with Moto and BlackBerry device offerings which would include the worlds most advanced mobile device security platform.

      Or… do it the way Apple and MSFT with their respective IP which is pay to play.

      1. no doubt that it gets Google thinking about buying RIM

        This is a good idea for whom? Google? Because RIM is a vertical platform and has a world-class OS?

        Or RIM, who is circling the rim of the bowl?

        You don’t know squat about Google or Android. Everyone knows there is no way on earth Rubin or Google is going to stop development of Android, the OS.

        They don’t need RIM! I don’t care how secure RIMs network claims to be, it’s shrinking everyday and has tumbled an order of magnitude since the days of Crackberry.

        Fuck Google and RIM and What?

  1. Why should Apple have to pay millions of euro/dollars in order to get justice? It wasn’t Apple that stole.

    It is just in case the verdict is overturned then the money goes to the cheaters?

      1. No it isn’t. Their not done. They have some remarkable people working over there and I expect good things to come from this business arrangement with Google, but I don’t care, I’m too busy using the stuff I own.

        1. ugh, they’re not done.

          I better get my correction in there before the grammar fuckwads come around bashing me for my spelling and grammatical errors.

          I can’t believe people actually take time to point out other’s faults. They do it, they say, to police people’s writing skills in order to make the internet a better place.

          Is that sweet of them? Maroons, all of them. I wonder if they stop people as they’re speaking to correct them? How long would that last?

          I heard from mom and dad all my life. I had no idea how smart I was, until they died.

  2. Could someone please explain why Apple has to PAY money to get the wheels of the injunctions moving? What is the logic here? Is this for damages in case the appeal is successful? Or what?

    Apple can enforce a Germany-wide permanent (but appealable and, therefore, preliminarily-enforceable) injunction now by posting a 25 million bond.
    If Apple posts another 10 million euros, it can also obligate Motorola to destroy any infringing material
    For yet another 10 million euros it can get a recall.

    I comprehend the appeal possibilities by Google. But throwing money at getting forcing the injunctions to happen NOW?!

    1. I’d like to add to that, like all financial instruments, there is tiered pricing for those who have the extra bucks to spend… For just 10-million more, we’ll hide the bodies.

      If I had to sue someone to establish ownership, I’d lose for the lack of money. It wouldn’t matter if I was right, if I can’t afford to prove it. That, is a fact of life.

      It’s like springing Voter ID laws on those who can’t prove who they are. No one gave a shit who they were until they showed up at the polls and they care even less now that they can’t prove they even belong here.

      At this moment in my life, I can’t prove who I am. I have no birth certificate and I wouldn’t know where to begin to find one. I was born in a tent in the English countryside and that tent and the surrounding area has changed in the last Sixty-years.

      I can prove WHO I am, but I can’t prove I belong here.

  3. Apple can afford to lose a bit of money (even if the CA retirement fund managers are peeved by it); but the legal reputation points as a genuine innovator not a follower are worth the pretty pennies. History will judge Google goons less kindly when the dust and smokescreens settle.

    1. just because you like Apple doesn’t prevent brand loyalty in other places. Most people have preferred cars, shoes, and peripherals. I’m fond of Bose and Logitech myself (although Logitech has been slipping lately)

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.