Stating that an order barring the sale of
Motorola phones could have "catastrophic effects" for the mobile
marketplace, Judge Richard Posner has given Apple his strongest hint yet that
the iDevice maker’s attempt to have a ban enforced on a number of Motorola
handsets is doomed.
Judge Posner had previously stated his
view that such an injunction would not be in the public interest. In response
to the jurist’s lack of empathy toward Apple’s case for injunctive relief,
Apple’s attorney, in an apparent attempt to appear more conciliatory, resorted
to the position that an injunction might alternatively force removal of the
technologies that it alleges Motorola has infringed, within three months.
Unconvinced, the Judge pointed out that
there would be nothing to prevent Apple from beginning a new action after that
three-month period, claiming Motorola to be still infringing whether or not
that was actually the case. And the likely upshot of that scenario would be yet
another attempt at banning Motorola’s devices. "That's all we need…” the judge said, “new actions, new suits, because
there's not enough litigation worldwide between Apple and Android."
Further, Judge Posner suggested that it
might be preferable, if Apple won, for the court to direct Motorola to pay a royalty
for each infringed patent. He added that Apple’s position, that of making
Motorola use inferior technology instead of paying royalties, would
disadvantage consumers, stating that "You can't just assume that
because someone has a patent, he has some deep moral right to exclude everyone
else from using the technology.”
It’s not in Apple’s marketing interests to
license patents to its competitors though, particularly Android-using OEM’s, as it’s
currently being outsold in the mobile phone space at a rate of nearly three to
one. The Cupertino colossus would much prefer to block sales of its
competitors’ devices than earn the relatively trifling sums that the patent
royalties in question might provide.
In the iPhone maker’s view, forcing
removal of Apple-patented technologies from Motorola’s hardware would eradicate
feature parity and help differentiate its devices in the marketplace.
Confirming the company’s approach to avoiding marketplace competition, Apple
attorney Matt Powers stated "It means we're not competing with them where they are using our technology against us”.
The only possible takeout from such an
unambiguous statement of position is that Apple has absolutely no intention of
licensing its technology to any genuine
competitor.
While this action is specifically against
Motorola Mobile at present, a win for Apple would set precedent for trial
against any Android OEMs who were found to infringe. In this way, Apple would
have the possibility of removing all of its major competitors from the US
market at a stroke, so you can see how much this ‘marketing by litigation’
approach means to the iPhone maker.
Judge Posner made no formal rulings during
the hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment