Apple wins patent suit against Motorola in Germany

A regional court in Germany has ruled that Motorola's implementation of its "swipe to unlock" infringes on a patent owned by Apple, although how one can patent swiping on a touch screen beggars belief. Still, the Munich court has sided with Apple and ordered a permanent injunction against certain 'infringing' Motorola devices. Motorola has announced its intention to appeal and while Apple can enforce the injunction virtually immediately, it must put up a bond to do so, with the risk that should Motorola prevail on appeal, the bond would be paid to Motorola in compensation for loss of sales. However, such a bond would be trifling for Apple, considering its US$100 billion cash reserves.

[Update] Apple wins injunction against Tab 10.1. Again...

[Update] Apple has been at it again, with a preliminary injunction awarded by a German court yesterday against the Galaxy Tab 10.1.

If you haven't been keeping up, Samsung got the original ban sent to appeal, based on Apple's community design having been considered "too broad" by the judge. Which might have let Samsung sell the 10.1 in Germany alongside the Galaxy Tab 10.1N, a Germany-only derivative designed to circumvent the original ban.

Dutch court rejects Apple's pleas for ban on Galaxy Tab

Following an earlier loss in its campaign to ban its competitor's products in the Netherlands, Samsung's primary distribution centre in Europe, Apple appealed (no pun intended) to The Hague court to have that ruling overturned and a sales injunction applied.

Today's ruling is the final word on that particular battle and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 can continue to be legally sold in the netherlands. In response to the decision, Samsung's Marketing Manager, Geert Mol stated "We are very pleased. This proves that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is distinctive and supports what we have always said."

The legal action was initiated under legislation that allows for a corporation to register something called a “community design” which broadly interpreted means that signature elements of a product's look and feel can be protected from imitation by another entity attempting to trade on the similarities. Today's decision is an outright rejection of Apple's claims that the Korean phone maker was in breach of said community design.

Samsung actions hint at aggressive stance against Apple

Samsung's actions are clear hints that
it's no longer content to remain on the
defensive in the mobile patent wars

In what looks like a more agressive stance by Samsung in response the increasingly litigious behaviour of Apple, Samsung is reportedly demanding details of a confidential supply arrangement between Apple and its baseband chip supplier Qualcomm.

A cross-licensing agreement between Qualcomm and Samsung is at issue, with a request from Samsung to the US District Court in California in which it has asked for “all agreements pursuant to which Qualcomm supplies or supplied ‘Qualcomm MDM6610’ chipsets to any person of entity and all documents that evidence, reflect or refer to the use by Apple of Qualcomm chipsets in iPhones or iPads”.

In other words, Samsung wants the information to finally establish if Apple is a direct customer of Qualcomm, or if it makes its purchases through a third party, critical to claims by the Korean phone maker that Apple infringes its intellectual property.

A new year, a new Apple law suit or two...

Apple succeeded in having the Galaxy Tab 10.1 banned

Unwilling to give up on its campaign to have Samsung's devices banned from Germany, and the EU zone, Apple has filed new suits in the Dusseldorf Regional Court, the very same jurisdiction that recently rejected the iDevice maker's injunction against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1N.

Evidently working on the principle that if at first you don't succeed, try, try again, Apple has targeted ten Samsung smartphones in its latest filing, including the Galaxy SII and Galaxy S Plus, thus widening its 'marketing by litigation' programme significantly. It's worth pointing out that by the time the suit plays out, the Samsung models will likely have been superceded and there is little chance that Apple can have a successful ban applied. However, that suggests that this time around, Apple's goal will be to get penalties awarded, something that could be costly to Samsung if the suit were successful.

Apple fails to obtain injunction against Motorola in the US

Image: Todaysiphone

Claims by Apple that Motorola's Droid line of Android powered smartphones infringe its patents were rejected by US regulatory body, the International Trade Commission in the last 24 hours. The results are another blow to Apple's "marketing by litigation" approach to marketplace competition. Had the decision gone Apple's way, there's little doubt that the iPhone maker would have pressed for a total ban on sales of the supposedly infringing Droid handsets in the 'States, a catastrophic result for Motorola. Fortunately though, the ITC concluded that Apple's claims were bogus and the Droids live on in the US of A.

Tech Crunch outs Apple as feeding a patent troll

In keeping with its strategy for world domination in consumer electronics, (and more relevant to AndroidNZ, the world of mobile devices), Apple has surreptitiously transferred a dozen patents that it previously "owned" to a non-existent corporate entity called Cliff Island LLC.

Tech crunch have done a little digging and it appears that Cliff Island is a shell company, sharing a physical address with Altitude Capital, the main investor behind patent trolling company Digitude Innovations (ironic name, n'est pas?).

Cliff Island then transferred those same patents to Digitude who have now filed a suit with the ITC (International Trade Commission) in the US against basically all the smartphone and tablet makers selling in America - except Apple, that is. How mysterious.

So what we're seeing here is Apple suing its competitors out of the market, yet again, but this time by proxy. And it's interesting that the patent transfers have taken place under some sneaky back-room sleight of hand.

The whole article and its links to a Forbes piece on Digitude can be read at the Tech Crunch site. It's worth a look at just how out of control Apple has become, and the folks at TC deserve the clicks for their excellent effort in bringing this to light.

This seems to be a case where the US DOJ may yet be involved. Interesting times.

Source: Tech Crunch