Slashdot Mirror


Apple Files Suit Against Motorola Xoom In EU

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."

181 comments

  1. I hope Apple win! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Xoom has rounded corners too - those copying bastards!

  2. Attacks all thin tablets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These are suits regarding the equivalent of design patents. If Apple thinks it has a design patent over both Samsung and Motorola (the two tablets are quite different from each other), it is basically claiming that it has a patent on the design of *any* thin tablet device.

    1. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by DrXym · · Score: 2

      These are suits regarding the equivalent of design patents. If Apple thinks it has a design patent over both Samsung and Motorola (the two tablets are quite different from each other), it is basically claiming that it has a patent on the design of *any* thin tablet device.

      Which would be utterly absurd. I can understand the Galaxy Tab thing since the devices were very similar in appearance. The Xoom looks nothing like an iPad in any way.

      I really can't understand what Samsung were thinking with their device at all. People who want to pay stupid money for an iPad like device have probably already paid stupid money for an actual iPad. Who are their market for this thing? Android users? I doubt Android users are at all enamoured by something that costs so much, and apes an iPad even in the bad ways such as high price, sealed in batteries, proprietary connectors etc.

    2. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why they didn't put a proper usb port and hdmi out on it is beyond me.

    3. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by DrXym · · Score: 2

      Why they didn't put a proper usb port and hdmi out on it is beyond me.

      Probably the same reason Apple don't. Because they can rip people off by selling them overpriced dongles & cables. It's bad enough that Apple does it, and completely unacceptable that an Android tablet should.

      IMO at the very least a tablet should have a Micro-b USB and SD / Micro SD slot. Better yet if it can charge & sync through the USB cable. If they want to shove their own connector on there too for docks / port replication / HDMI / hi speed charging out then fine but even for that there is a industry standard called PDMI which combines HDMI, USB, power and some other stuff into a single connector.

    4. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      These are suits regarding the equivalent of design patents. If Apple thinks it has a design patent over both Samsung and Motorola (the two tablets are quite different from each other), it is basically claiming that it has a patent on the design of *any* thin tablet device.

      Which would be utterly absurd. I can understand the Galaxy Tab thing since the devices were very similar in appearance.

      I would be interested if you could point to two LCD televisions which look in any way different apart from the manufacturers logo.

    5. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by DrXym · · Score: 1

      I would be interested if you could point to two LCD televisions which look in any way different apart from the manufacturers logo.

      Irrelevant and wrong - brand name TVs are generally quite distinct from each other in terms of their bezel, base, gloss / matte finish, decals, remote control, speakers, ports, colour scheme etc. Put a Sony, Toshiba, Samsung, LG and Sharp TV next to each other and you'd instantly notice many differences. Put a bunch of laptops or phones next to each other and the same will be true.

      In this case we see Samsung mimic a lot of the visual cues of the iPad, to such an extent that most reasonable people would believe it was intentional. While I am anti Apple in most things I am not surprised they are upset and I would not be surprised if the Tab gets pulled and redesigned. That said, Apple are thieving bastards when it suits them so I wouldn't feel any sympathy if they ultimately lose to Samsung.

      Additionally I see no justification for Apple to extend legal action to other tablets such as the Xoom, Eee Pad, Iconia etc., which IMO do not remotely resemble the iPad at all except in ways that come from the nature of the devices. Such actions appear to be anticompetitive rather than supported by any legimate legal reason. I hope they fail and fail hard there too.

    6. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by Dog-Cow · · Score: 0

      I hope you break your neck coming down off that high horse. "Completely unacceptable" my ass.

    7. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by JBMcB · · Score: 1

      +1

      Samsung's MO is to copy successful designs as closely as possible. There's a reason refer to them as Samesung.

      Motorla Razr - Samsung A900
      Motorola Slvr - Samsung T509
      Blackberry - Samsung Blackjack

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    8. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 1

      Haha, dongle.

    9. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by DrXym · · Score: 2

      Well if you think it's acceptable I suggest you slap $50-100 onto the price of such devices to account for all the proprietary shit you need to buy and tote around to use the device in a non proprietary way. And if you don't do that then you too agree it's not acceptable. And it's not acceptable.

    10. Re:Attacks all thin tablets by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      I agree. I've been wondering why they just don't come up with a different design (like gnome3 or unity or a billion other possibilities). People would still buy it, maybe even more people would buy it. It really does seem like they have gone out of their way to make it look and work like an Ipad.

  3. Competing in court is not wise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many times Google has attacked with its patents to competitors like what Apple, Microsoft and Nokia does?

  4. Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is an Arsehole. You are the Apple of my Arsehole.

  5. Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by phonewebcam · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's one thing to bully johnny foreigner about like HTC, Samsung etc. Motorola made the first mobile call in 1973, 3 years before Apple existed (well, that's if you are talking about the Apple with the same name as the Beatles record label which hates copying so much). Motorola has thousands of patents going right back through this peroid. You can only imagine how many of these relate to fundamental baseband radio tech. So these newcomers whining about the shape of the corners on their toys don't seem to realise the established guys quite literally have their finger over the button when it comes to radio comms. Let's see how many tablets/phones they sell when they can't make airtime connections.

    1. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1, Informative

      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...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      Motorola ? Meh... I think our only hope is that Oracle start selling rounded corner tablets.

    3. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by MacTO · · Score: 2

      I don't know how many of these are relevant, but Motorola has thousands of patents with the keyword radio since 1991:

      Results of Search in US Patent Collection db for:
      ((AN/motorola AND radio) AND ISD/19910101->20110101): 7329 patents.

    4. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should learn the law instead of just making shiat up and spewing it.

      Florian Mueller, anyone?

    5. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious, the post right above yours makes you look like a total crap-spewing moron.

    6. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you think Motorola have stood still and dont have even more patents in the meantime?

      You truly dont know WTF you speak of

    7. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are assuming they patented the mobile than stopped securing new patents as mobile tech progressed. That is a naive assumption.

    8. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by BadlandZ · · Score: 1

      Wow... You're way off on a few things, for one, any prior art goes against the right to enforce a patent, expired or not, if they own them or not, not just the defendants. (look up what "prior art" means). Just because Motorola had patents doesn't make them any more strong to defend themselves.

    9. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by Marc+Madness · · Score: 1

      Motorola made the first mobile call in 1973, 3 years before Apple existed

      Maybe Motorola should remind Apple that the very first Macintosh was powered by a Motorola 6809E microprocessor. Could this be an example of biting the hand that feeds (or has fed)?

    10. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    11. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Nuke both Apple and Oracle from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    12. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by RoccamOccam · · Score: 1

      Was this a pre-production type unit? I thought that the Macs started with the 68000 family.

    13. Re:Bad move. You do NOT fuck with Motorola. by phonewebcam · · Score: 1

      Did someone say prior art?
      I wonder if these guys from 1994 took their idea from Kubrick in 1965 and just added rounded corners to their tablet?

  6. All your rectangle are belong to Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You don't get it, you should think different. The rectangle is now Apple's "intellectual property". Euclid can go fuck himself.

    1. Re:All your rectangle are belong to Apple by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      You don't get it, you should think different. The rectangle is now Apple's "intellectual property". Euclid can go fuck himself.

      ROFL.. classic

    2. Re:All your rectangle are belong to Apple by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      Euclid

      Do you ever wonder how Euler pronounced that?

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    3. Re:All your rectangle are belong to Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carefully.

    4. Re:All your rectangle are belong to Apple by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      With great respect and a german accent

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  7. Bad for everyone by myurr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know the Apple fanbois will be out in force to defend this as they believe Apple should be the only player in the market place, but Apple's new litigious dream of being the only player in the market is bad for everyone. Apple didn't invent the smart phone or the tablet, so if monopolies of these devices were allowed then Apple wouldn't have been able to make their beloved iDevices in the first place.

    The reason Apple themselves are doing this is because they want to control the way everyone consumes media. They want to replace the PC, newspapers, magazines, and ultimately the TV putting them all under their control and charging their 30% fee for allowing access to content producers to their public. For this strategy to work long term, especially in the face of free competition from Android where large corporates can set up their own channels and distribution mechanisms, they need 80+% market share (20 - 40% just isn't enough to command the fees Apple want to charge). They've seen how their early lead in the smart phone marketplace has been eroded and now surpassed by Android, and they fear that the same will happen with the iPad.

    This isn't about protecting intellectual property or Apple wanting just reward for their 'innovation'. This is a land grab aimed at capturing and locking in market share through litigation. Apple *are* scared of Android, and especially these latest tablets like the Samsung, not because they're currently outselling the iPad but because they will most likely be the first steps to Android gaining momentum in the tablet market and establishing itself as a viable competitor. Once that happens it will only be a matter of time as Apple cannot keep up with the huge variety of products their competitors will release - exactly what happened in the smart phone arena.

    1. Re:Bad for everyone by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I think it's great news. A big company, with a product that's already so successful that they don't need any extra protection, is using the legal system to batter the competition. Those of us who wanted a clear and unambiguous example of the harm that current IP law does now have one to show our elected representatives.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a MAC user and I find Apples actions pathetic.

    3. Re:Bad for everyone by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      I know the Apple fanbois will be out in force to defend this as they believe Apple should be the only player in the market place, but Apple's new litigious dream of being the only player in the market is bad for everyone. Apple didn't invent the smart phone or the tablet, so if monopolies of these devices were allowed then Apple wouldn't have been able to make their beloved iDevices in the first place. The reason Apple themselves are doing this is because they want to control the way everyone consumes media. They want to replace the PC, newspapers, magazines, and ultimately the TV putting them all under their control and charging their 30% fee for allowing access to content producers to their public. For this strategy to work long term, especially in the face of free competition from Android where large corporates can set up their own channels and distribution mechanisms, they need 80+% market share (20 - 40% just isn't enough to command the fees Apple want to charge). They've seen how their early lead in the smart phone marketplace has been eroded and now surpassed by Android, and they fear that the same will happen with the iPad. This isn't about protecting intellectual property or Apple wanting just reward for their 'innovation'. This is a land grab aimed at capturing and locking in market share through litigation. Apple *are* scared of Android, and especially these latest tablets like the Samsung, not because they're currently outselling the iPad but because they will most likely be the first steps to Android gaining momentum in the tablet market and establishing itself as a viable competitor. Once that happens it will only be a matter of time as Apple cannot keep up with the huge variety of products their competitors will release - exactly what happened in the smart phone arena.

      I am a MAC user and I approve this message.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    4. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They'll lose it anyway, because they're idiots.
      They have one iPad, ONE design, not one line of products, but ONE design. The iPad, iPhone are made for a very restricted group of people, and they're trying to force this on everyone.
      They didn't lose the smartphone market because of Android, they lost it because they lack variety.(and no, stickers don't count as variety)

    5. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'n a Daily Mail reader and I'm perpetually confused and angry.

    6. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go right ahead. An American company, which owns intellectual property but is not a patent troll because it builds stuff, and always supplies laptops to the good guys in movies, is currently the company with the largest market capitalization and still growing. Yeah, painting that as an example of harm coming from patent law is going to work really well.

      (Just to be clear: I have no Apple gear except for an iPod which I got as a gift. I use it with open source software and hate Apple for not using standard connectors. As far as I am concerned, Apple can go to hell. IMHO, short of putting a competitor's logo on a device, there should be no limit to what you can build. That doesn't mean the system is not working as designed.)

    7. Re:Bad for everyone by vga_init · · Score: 1

      I am a PC user and I totally agree with you

    8. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will just cut a deal and exchange some money. Then they can go in together and attack the rest of the posers who want to earn a living. This is bad.

    9. Re:Bad for everyone by Imbrondir · · Score: 1

      You're really unfair. This isn't bad for everyone. It's very good for Apple. It's also very good for IP troll companies to remember how much power they can yield if one of their victims denies a lawsuit. And their children. Who are you to deny a Porche 911 for their 18th birthday of IP troll company owners children. Will no one think of the children??

    10. Re:Bad for everyone by 605dave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you were a Mac user you wouldn't write it MAC.

      --
      Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    11. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's too bad that the elected so-called representatives won't listen. Unless Motorola has a plant somewhere here in the US, and workers from that plant make up a majority of a particular congressional district. Then there'd be a chance of turning one vote.

      We can't get our finances in order, we can't run effective schools, we can't get a real healthcare system, we can't move off coal power to safe nuclear designs that have existed for decades now. But before any of that, I'd like to see that fundamental principles like "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" are protected, and that efforts are made to reduce police and other governmental corruption.

      IP law ranks around 20th on my list. And I really dislike how our IP laws have become. But there's more important things to write to your Congress about. They may even decide to listen to you about some of them! (like, finances)

    12. Re:Bad for everyone by Bongo · · Score: 1

      Yes it is a land grab. But it is land nobody else seems to have known existed. People said "the iPad is just a giant iPhone, what's the point?? LOL!!". Well it turns out that if you make something very much like an iPad it can sell really well. Really, nobody should want an iPad, nor an Android tablet (no real keyboard for a start). These companies should just ignore the iPad, after all it is just a fad. /sarc I don't know how much control and power Apple or any company ought to have in fairness legally for what Apple did, but the patent system seems woefully broken for promoting innovation. It seems to hold back innovators whilst rewarding leeches.

      Plus there's another issue: sometimes someone setting a standard by force can be beneficial in other ways. If the government can't do it (because they're too lame) then companies might, by playing hard and winning in the market. A monopoly isn't in itself bad for the consumer -- it can at times render other benefits to the consumer. The trouble is of course if you really want to have an Android 10" tablet and there are none available. But then other people might like to have ebooks and media go digital sooner -- technical progress -- so, that infrastructure needs forcing on the industry by a company with the power to do so. When I board a plane I don't care if it is an Airbus or a Boeing, I care about the convenience and price so that I can use the flight to get on with what I really want to do. Google is a pretty big monopoly but for the time being I don't care, there's too many benefits to having it for other things.

      If the iPad as a force can help drive innovation in other ways, like drag publishers out of the Jurassic period, then that's one benefit. It is like a monogamous relationship -- there are benefits to be had that you don't get with an "open" relationship, and likewise sometimes it is better to not be in a relationship.

      Open or closed, and choice or standard, aren't principles; they're just states. And sometimes one state is more useful and sometimes the other state is more useful.

      At the moment, I feel the tablet form factor is still too new and untrusted for real work, so it needs a lot of control and focus -- so I'd prefer there not be a lot of competitors. Tablets need to become accepted as a real new platform. Once that happens, get the monopoly to break up.

      The question is, for me, if Android tablets had been first to market, would we be seeing so much interest in tablets as a new platform?

      Or would they just be, "giant iPods, what's the point, LOL?"

      The tablet needs a really good working trustable ecosystem to get established as a real viable platform.

    13. Re:Bad for everyone by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      You seem to be under the impression that I'm in the USA. I'm not sure why my post would give you that impression...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    14. Re:Bad for everyone by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Read the comments above...

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    15. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing this isn't how the free market and competition works, then.
      I'm glad only one car manufacturer produces minivans, for example.
      Oh wait ...

    16. Re:Bad for everyone by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      It's also a good thing we don't have a free market.

    17. Re:Bad for everyone by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      They'll lose it anyway, because they're idiots. They have one iPad, ONE design, not one line of products, but ONE design. The iPad, iPhone are made for a very restricted group of people, and they're trying to force this on everyone. They didn't lose the smartphone market because of Android, they lost it because they lack variety.(and no, stickers don't count as variety)

      Yup. Shame they can barely get well over one hundred million iOS devices out into the marketplace. LOSERS!

    18. Re:Bad for everyone by Kartu · · Score: 1

      So did Asus with netbooks. As with tablets, they existed for quite a while, but became popular only after company "bla" created successfull (overhyped) product "bla".
      I don't recall Asus sueing anyone for creating netbooks though.

      Remind me, whom did the company that created first notebook sue, for, uhm, creating notebooks...

    19. Re:Bad for everyone by ThisIsSaei · · Score: 1

      Apple did not make the first tablet, nor the first successful tablet.

    20. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually they're only buying time because this is battle they can't win: the rest of the world has too many lobbyists, too many jobs to lose (politicians listen to these matters) and too many lawyers for Apple to be able to lock them out with patents and those kind of things. However every day they gain is more cash in their pockets. That's why they're doing it. If in the process the patents system will finally go bust, we'll rejoice.

    21. Re:Bad for everyone by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      "(no real keyboard for a start)" - See Asus Transformer. It is the one and only reason that I bought in to the tablet market and is also the case for 4 of the other 8 tablet owners I know. 3 of the others are raging Apple fan boys and the 4th has a Xoom from before the Transformer came out that he got to investigate iPad alternatives.

      As for a monopoly, yes, if someone legitimately can do so much better that they can force a standard, that is good, but that doesn't require a monopoly. Google has done just that with Android by forcing a standard by being the big kid on the block that lets other people actually play. The point of a standard is to have something that lets devices inter-operate while still competing and in that case, consumers win. In a monopoly where consumers have no choice and the monopoly crushes all attempts to compete through legal means rather than the quality of the product, the consumer 100% loses 100% of the time.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    22. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet the responses I've received from my senator indicate that he gives not a rats' ass because the teabaggers in my state elected him.

    23. Re:Bad for everyone by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      I've had more Macintosh computers than most people and I don't regard calling it a MAC offensive. The evolution of the brand is kinda funny. There was a time when the word "Macintosh" was printed on the bezel, then they Apple re-branded the entire line as Mac.

      What is a Mac? I don't even know anymore - the only difference between them these days is the software and proprietary code to lock people out from running that software on identical Dell/HP/Lenovo etc hardware.

    24. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Apple did invent the smart phone and tablet as they are known today. That's why Android UI looks like iPhone and why Galaxy Tab looks just like iPad. Because Apple almost completely redefined these devices.

      This isn't about protecting intellectual property or Apple wanting just reward for their 'innovation'. This is a land grab aimed at capturing and locking in market share through litigation.

      A 'land grab' to capture and lock in a market is exactly the reward for innovating. It's called patents, and that's what they do. Apple is using patents for the purpose they were invented for, one that has served the markets for hundreds of years. You guys are just complaining about it because 'your team' has basically not done any inventing at all. If Google wanted to sue Apple, what would they sue them over?

    25. Re:Bad for everyone by sacridias · · Score: 2

      I find Apple a funny little company.
      A few years ago, maybe a couple of decades, they were nobody, on their way out. Microsoft gets hit with a lawsuit and gives Apple life again.
      Perhaps it is time Apple gets smacked. I think all other cellular makers need to hit Apple with a join lawsuit as a message to stop. Perhaps if they get everyone to nail Apple to the wall their lawyers will be so busy trying to defend they will stop attacking one company after another.
      Apple Competitors, stop waiting for your turn, unite to push Apple on the ropes. The governments shouldn't have to be involved, there are plenty of people to fight together, stop Apple, form alliances long enough to kill the sue happy giant.
      Sure they have lots of money now, but after they get nailed with a series of lawsuits from everyone they compete with, they will be hard pressed to pay anyone but the lawyers. Enough law suits against them at the same time ensures they are less able to focus on one victim at a time, the army of evil lawyers you hire will outnumber the evil lawyers they hire, and while lawyers are the only winners here, they will think twice before they try suing the next person.

    26. Re:Bad for everyone by ubergeek65536 · · Score: 1

      What make you think the elected representatives are on your side?

    27. Re:Bad for everyone by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Well, my MEP is an active campaigner for the FFII. This is exactly the kind of thing she needs as a case study for her colleagues. My MP won by a very narrow margin last time so is looking to spend this term, at least, proving to his constituency that they should vote for him.

      Why, are your elected representatives not on your side? Have you talked to them, or just assumed that they aren't? And if you have, what are you doing to prevent them from being elected again next time?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    28. Re:Bad for everyone by Americano · · Score: 1

      Yes, Dodge Caravans, Honda Odysseys and Toyota Siennas are all part of the market segment known as "minivans." Line 3 of them up side by side, would you confuse one for the other? Or would you be able to tell them apart easily? Now repeat that exercise with a Xoom, Galaxy Tab, and iPad. Much stronger similarities, don't you think?

      And that's what these suits are about: You're welcome to create a competing, similar product in the free market. You're not allowed to just rip off someone else's design and slap your label on it. Whether or not the Galaxy & Xoom are "too similar" to the iPad is up to the court to decide, but pretending that the Galaxy & Xoom were pre-existing product lines that predate the iPad is just foolishness. They are clearly responses to the iPad, and there is a fairly strong similarity. So, the court will review and determine whether or not that similarity rises to the level of an actionable infringement.

    29. Re:Bad for everyone by Americano · · Score: 1

      That rather depends on how you define "successful," I suspect. What's your nomination for first successful tablet?

    30. Re:Bad for everyone by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      So Asus didn't protect their IP and Apple should follow suit, is that your argument? Did they really invent something different or did they just shrink it down?

    31. Re:Bad for everyone by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Never said they made the first tablet, and it really doesn't' matter if they did or not, they innovated and they DID make the first successful tablet.

    32. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple ripped off the Crunchpad design.

    33. Re:Bad for everyone by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      I've had more Macintosh computers than most people and I don't regard calling it a MAC offensive.

      It's not offensive, just confusing. A Mac is a computer made by Apple. MAC is an up scale Canadian line of cosmetics. Use the wrong one without context and people will start to think you are a cross dresser.

    34. Re:Bad for everyone by Americano · · Score: 1

      Bet they didn't. If you've seen early Crunchpad prototypes, they looked NOTHING like the iPad. It wasn't until their final launch prototype was unveiled that the resemblance even began.

      The iPad shares a common design history with the iPhone, and R&D started on the iPad *before* the iPhone. I'd be willing to bet that Apple has several years worth of prototypes and design documents showing that their development of the "look" of the iPad happened before the CrunchPad was a twinkle in Mr. Arrington's eye.

      But nice try.

    35. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Devil's advocate.... Patents exist to protect innovation. There have been various attempts over many years to produce tablets that everybody wants. Nobody has succeeded. Then Apple came along and did _something_ right. There's clearly innovation there, and now others are trying to copy that innovation. Why do you think that the innovation should not be protected? It's easily demonstrable that they came up with something that's different than what everybody else had tried, and it's equally obvious that Xoom, et al are trying to copy what they got right.

    36. Re:Bad for everyone by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I've had more Macintosh computers than most people and I don't regard calling it a MAC offensive. The evolution of the brand is kinda funny. There was a time when the word "Macintosh" was printed on the bezel, then they Apple re-branded the entire line as Mac.

      What is a Mac? I don't even know anymore - the only difference between them these days is the software and proprietary code to lock people out from running that software on identical Dell/HP/Lenovo etc hardware.

      I don't regard calling it a MAC offensive, just incorrect. MAC is an acronym, and has a very specific meaning in computing circles: "M(andatory|edia|edium) Access Control." When people ask you for your MAC, they're not usually asking for your laptop, they're asking for your access credentials -- usually in the form of your Ethernet MAC ID -- each network card has a unique one.

      So, while only some people use a Mac, everyone on the internet uses a MAC.

    37. Re:Bad for everyone by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, and PC is an acronym too, standing for Personal Computer. I consider my Mac just as much a PC as my other hardware.
      Since Mac is a brand name, using it in CAPS would be closer to talking about WINDOWS (which, of course, some people do, as it is a descendant of MS DOS, the MicroSoft Disk Operating System).

    38. Re:Bad for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known lots of Mac users that write it as MAC because they honestly just don't know the difference. They're just normal users who don't know about protocols or standards.

    39. Re:Bad for everyone by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Depends on what you mean by offensive.

      I'm a long-time Macintosh developer. When looking at job postings and the like, if I saw an advertisement looking for a MAC developer, I knew the company "didn't get it" and it's probably not a company I'd like to work for. If I saw "Mac" or "Macintosh," they were worth checking out.

      It's like calling it "Mac Oh-Ess-Ex" instead of "Mac Oh-Ess-Ten" or, arguably, "lynux" instead of "linux."

  8. Nice one Apple by mormop · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    1. Re:Nice one Apple by erroneus · · Score: 1

      I think they should present this in some form at every public court hearing of every case initiated by Apple. I'm pretty sure that the legal doctrine of estoppel doesn't fully apply here, but it certainly gives one a little pause.

    2. Re:Nice one Apple by jamiesan · · Score: 1

      There should be a doctrine of eslowel or epausel?

  9. Well... by Marneus68 · · Score: 1

    I'm really happy I managed to get an HexoPC a few month ago. In a near future anything looking like more or less like an iPad will not be allowed to be sold any-more, this is getting ridiculous. If you plan to buy any kind of photo frame (digital or not) buy them now... we don't know what Apple will do next since anything flat with a screen seem to in the line of sight of the Apple troll lawyers.

  10. "Patent expert"? by naich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He's not much of a "patent expert" if he can't tell that this case is not about patents. Maybe "clueless troll Florian Mueller" would be more accurate?

    1. Re:"Patent expert"? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      The man who drove the no software patents project in the EU and kept them out for years is not a patent expert according to you ?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    2. Re:"Patent expert"? by king_grumpy · · Score: 1

      Seeing Florian Troller's name in the excerpt is enough to ensure I never RTFA. Thanks to OP for saving me the time - it's better spent writing this post, or getting a colonoscopy.

    3. Re:"Patent expert"? by naich · · Score: 2

      What he did in the past doesn't change the fact that he seems to have turned into a troll, repeating the same untruths over and over again like a broken record.

    4. Re:"Patent expert"? by Kynde · · Score: 0

      Seeing Florian Troller's name in the excerpt is enough to ensure I never RTFA. Thanks to OP for saving me the time - it's better spent writing this post, or getting a colonoscopy.

      Now, look who's trolling... I'm don't know much about Florian Muller, but I do know that he's the founder of the NoSoftwarePatents. That, to me, a sw developer, is quite enough to convince that he is not really troll unless peered through corporate goggles (or possibly in this case, an apple fanboy goggles).

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    5. Re:"Patent expert"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Florian Müller is a PR expert, not a patent expert. And it's primarily the FFII that killed the software patents directive, not Florian Müller. To some extent even in spite of him.

    6. Re:"Patent expert"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You have clearly not been paying attention for the last... years...

    7. Re:"Patent expert"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm don't know much about Florian Muller, but I do know that he's the founder of the NoSoftwarePatents. That, to me, a sw developer, is quite enough to convince that he is not really troll

      Nevertheless, he is one in this case. He is a plain PR consultant with a simple policy: he works for whoever pays his cheque. Back in the days that was a consortium led by MySQL. He refuses to disclose who his current employer is.

      If you want some information about his trolling since the software patents stint that made him famous, there are several examples, even to the point that Linus felt compelled to tell him to stop whining (see last paragraph of the article).

    8. Re:"Patent expert"? by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Now, look who's trolling... I'm don't know much about Florian Muller, but I do know that he's the founder of the NoSoftwarePatents. That, to me, a sw developer, is quite enough to convince that he is not really troll unless peered through corporate goggles (or possibly in this case, an apple fanboy goggles).

      He is also the guy who recommended to every developer in the Lodsys affair to roll over and pay up.

  11. Why just 10" Tablets? by msgmonkey · · Score: 1

    It's interesting that they seem to just be going after the 10" tablets. Samsung make 7" tablets too, why did Apple not get an injunction on those too? Or is that basically they do not want anything that could compete with an Ipad be sold?

    1. Re:Why just 10" Tablets? by xnpu · · Score: 2

      In one of the keynote speeches Steve said (in different words) that 7" is just a bad choice. Who knows, maybe they expect customers to regret 7" purchase choices and decide that Samsung suck for selling it to them.

    2. Re:Why just 10" Tablets? by MrDoh! · · Score: 1

      I guess it'd be hard to justify going after the 7inchers as they did exist in greater numbers before the iPad was even officially announced. (sure there were some 10inch tablets before the iPad was announced, shame the JooJoo tablet can't counter sue Apple for THEIR look and feel!)

      As to the shape/design of the iPad, we've seen there were devices that had that bezel shape before Apple used it too. This is all reeking of desperation from Apple; as others have commented above, they're seeing the market for the phones dissolve, and knowing they can't compete on technical innovation, are litigating.

      --
      Waiting for an amusing sig.
    3. Re:Why just 10" Tablets? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Maybe Apples patent only covers 10" devices. You know, size matters. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Why just 10" Tablets? by SirJorgelOfBorgel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am a developer, so I have quite a bit of hardware lying around. I have several 10" and 7" tablets. I strongly prefer the 7" ones. While a 10" is really nice around the house, when you're mobile a 7" is just so much more preferable. And you don't really miss the size at home either. The great advantage of the 7"-ers is that you can comfortably hold them in one hand for long periods, something you cannot do with the 10" tablets.

      Then again, that will depend on what you do with it. However, I find 7" being "a bad choice" in general complete bullshit.

    5. Re:Why just 10" Tablets? by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      I don't own a tablet, but I sometimes buy paperback books and I think there's probably reasons for why they are about 6" big. As you said, one reason is that you can carry them with one hand. Another is that they can be carried in a woman's handbag.

      That's not to say that there isn't room for a 10" tablet. I think 10-12" is probably just right for something that spends most of its time sitting on your coffee table.

  12. patent expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Since when is Florian a patent expert?

    1. Re:patent expert? by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Uhm, we're all patent experts. Any of us who have been following these patent cases and learning all the gritty details behind the scenes are becoming patent experts. Turns out, "expert" is a rather imprecise word. At best it means "knows more than the average joe on the streets" and that would be a significant portion of the slashdot demograhic and anyone who can sell garbage articles to tech magazines.

    2. Re:patent expert? by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Not really. An expert is someone who has an authoritative knowledge about his area of expertise, i.e. someone who could probably stand in court and defend a case in patent law. On slashdot most are opinionated laypeople informed to a smaller or larger degree on the subject. Also, I hereby refuse to discuss the expertitude of the dude from TFA.

    3. Re:patent expert? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      At best it means "knows more than the average joe on the streets"

      So, again, how does that make Florian an expert? He's been accused of being a shill for Microsoft, but I don't think anyone with a budget the size of Microsoft's would hire anyone so inept - almost everything he says is wrong. On the subject of patents, he's less accurate than Magic 8 Ball, let alone the average Joe on the streets...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:patent expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's young and needs the money.

      That name is never mentioned without the "patent expert" prefix, as if he talked of himself in the third person: "Patent expert Florian Mueller needs to go potty. Patent expert Florian Mueller will be right back. Please wait for patent expert Florian Mueller before you continue."

    5. Re:Patent expert? by kthreadd · · Score: 0

      The guy is just a troll machine not a patent expert. He has an agenda against Linux and Android.

      Just because Android uses Linux does not mean that Android and Linux is the same thing. Most Android phones are just locked-in iOS wannabes anyway no matter how free the kernel is.

    6. Re:patent expert? by bmo · · Score: 1

      >So, again, how does that make Florian an expert? He's been accused of being a shill for Microsoft, but I don't think anyone with a budget the size of Microsoft's would hire anyone so inept - almost everything he says is wrong. On the subject of patents, he's less accurate than Magic 8 Ball, let alone the average Joe on the streets..

      Microsoft hired SCO.

      Chew on that one for a while.

      Florian is surely on Microsoft's payroll as sure as Robert Enderle, Dan "lyin'" Lyons, everyone at ZDNet, etc.

      "He's just a puppet himself" - Aramaki

      --
      BMO

    7. Re:Patent expert? by Kvasio · · Score: 1

      if the GP claimed Linux = Android, he/she would have written "He has agenda against Linux".

      Do not moronize /. above regular level.

    8. Re:Patent expert? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Fair enough.

    9. Re:patent expert? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Uhm, we're all patent experts. Any of us who have been following these patent cases and learning all the gritty details behind the scenes are becoming patent experts.

      I know patent experts. Almost nobody that posts on Slashdot is even remotely close.

    10. Re:patent expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're expert enough to know that patents can only be applied to physical devices, not software, design or the non existent thing people like to call "Intellectual Property".

      Any "Patent Expert" claiming otherwise is an amateur.

  13. Those who can, do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those who can't - sue. As more and more people make better phones and tablets we'll only see more of that from Apple, not more "innovation".

    1. Re:Those who can, do. by intheshelter · · Score: 0

      Those who can, do. . . . .how true. Which is why Apple released the iPhone and iPad and everyone else saw they were successful with their approach and jumped on the bandwagon and copied them. How difficult is that to understand?

    2. Re:Those who can, do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you look at the world as a black-and-white snapshot, it is probably very easy. Regretfully, the world is neither a static picture, nor black and white. Apple was a leader when it released the iPhone and the iPad. This was, however 5 years ago. Since then, most of the innovation has happened outside of Apple's camp.

      Excluding, of course, some recent Apple R&D work on the antennas.

  14. Re:"Patent expert" or a "Troll" Florian Mueller by sunr2007 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  15. Blatant by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

    Blatant anti-competitive practice. You can't buy up companies to kill competition, cause you'll get an anti-trust suit, so you just sue them out of the market and the government has to back you up.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    1. Re:Blatant by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I think Apple's current level of evil has surpassed Microsoft's peak around the mid/late 90s.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  16. There'd be a limit by aglider · · Score: 1

    Apple will sue any company building anything similar to any iThing.
    Both Samsung's and Motorola's products are very similar to the Apples'.
    Nonetheless there's a clearly visible logo on them showing they ARE NOT APPLES'.
    While I do understand that a design is something to be protect somehow, you should not go the Apple way.
    Apple should focus on the meat (superior hardware, better software, funnier user experience), not on the skin.
    What if I build a pad with squared or polygonal corners?
    And what if unbranded unnamed chinese companies will start selling iPad clones running Android?

    --
    [Internal error: ads042.1e100.net is unreachable]

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  17. I read this until.. by EasyTarget · · Score: 0

    "Patent expert Florian Mueller".

    All the warning you need that this is lame. ... yawn. On to the next story.

    --
    "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
    1. Re:I read this until.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should read

          Self Opinionated Patent Shill Florian ....

      He still hasn't answered those questions about who is funding him...

  18. Patent expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The guy is just a troll machine not a patent expert. He has an agenda against Linux and Android.

  19. Better design by flex941 · · Score: 0

    Yes, better design, of course. Except Motorola Xoom is better than iPad.

    In almost every way:

    1) Hardware design - much more powerful, and that wide-screen!!! (aargh ugly ipad)
    2) Product look - just nice, not as thin as ipad, but really better. Except that SD-card.
    3) Software design - I don't know it just seems so much better and flexible than ios or wthever it was. Thanks Google.
    4) Customer support design - So much promises about software update in Europe and I'm still calm. Joking here.

    So I really don't see the basis for Apple actions. And I'm sure this all could be said about Galaxy Tab 2 too.
    Oh, I own Xoom.

    1. Re:Better design by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it was SOOOOO good that it died on the vine. So much for your budding career as an analyst. . . .

    2. Re:Better design by Lifyre · · Score: 1

      While I'm not agreeing with the GP how did the Xoom die on the vine? Last I checked I could buy it (still), Android is still going strong though it is being challenged, and I know several people who love their Xoom. Just because it isn't as popular as the iPad doesn't mean it died on the vine.

      --
      I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
    3. Re:Better design by flex941 · · Score: 1

      It sure did die on the vine /wink/ and I'm also a career analyst /wink-wink/.

  20. Prior art design by zebslash · · Score: 5, Informative

    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 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 and on OsNews: http://www.osnews.com/

    1. Re:Prior art design by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      As seen on these videos, this looked exactlty like an iPad!

      Except that it doesn't.

      Now, don't get me wrong..
      I think 90% of the tablets out there look like each other; a large screen with a bezel with rounded corners and rounded-corner icons laid out on a straight grid (I so do wish Microsoft would have continued their hexagonal grid, it was refreshing).

      I also think that Apple are silly for complaining about a competing tablet looking rather much like the iPad.

      However, I certainly see more of a resemblance between the Galaxy Tab and the iPad than I do between the device in the video and an iPad or the Galaxy Tab.

      If Samsung comes up with prior art challenging all, or at least the majority of the specifics, they might stand something of a chance in the Dutch courts - but just pointing at that video and going "look! a tablet from 1994!" isn't going to cut it.

      Not that it'll help much - unless they want to tacitly allow a grey market out of The Netherlands, they still have the EU-wide (minus NL) injunction out of Germany to deal with.. precious time, and money, is being lost there and by the time that gets resolved - unless the German / EU courts can fast-track things - the fight will have become moot as they'll have designed an alternative device by that time.

    2. Re:Prior art design by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      From the early 90s:
      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5144094928842683632

      There are NeXt videos from the late 80s which still have some features that we haven't picked up today. the NeXt system fostered amazing stuff for the 90s which we are still seeing as "new" today its like it rubbed off on other companies who used it... the 1st web browser etc all were done on there. The dock was on there... before the windows crap bar. etc. When Steve left Apple he took the really great people with him; Apple was running on 1985 fumes until it bought NeXt.

      Apple has been implementing ideas from the late 80s and early 90s for the last 10 years. The differences are rather minor; the concepts haven't changed from what Steve's dream team thought of back then. Its just refined versions of the same stuff.

      Now if the IP nightmare of today existed when Apple started and Steve knew his company was going to lose to cheap copycats -- or more accurately, the hardware business was being killed by the software business; he would have fought to maintain his hardware business like he is doing today but with the IP laws of today (and the stupid new propaganda like "Intellectual Property" a P.R. creation that stifles debate... its like 1984, define the language and control thought.) We'd have nothing like today... Hardware companies would likely be better positioned instead of being junk merchants with low margins and software wouldn't dominate as much as it has under MS's rein. Apple clones may have been allowed; because insane IP would have given them the control they want (and cut of the profits.) Remember, apple had all the big stuff early on; they bought all those Xerox ideas like office networking, mouse, the desktop metaphors, WYSIWYG, all concepts which today people can claim ownership in our broken "IP" system -- which allows for broad concept ownership.

    3. Re:Prior art design by zebslash · · Score: 1

      Now, don't get me wrong..
      I think 90% of the tablets out there look like each other; a large screen with a bezel with rounded corners and rounded-corner icons laid out on a straight grid (I so do wish Microsoft would have continued their hexagonal grid, it was refreshing).

      But that is the point of these court hearings. Apple does not use patents or copyright, but merely aspect or design. They got an injuction on the basis that they filled a device drawing that is rectangular and black. This existed long before Apple, and should be taken into account in the court. Furthermore, in the German decision, Samsung was not even notified and did not defend their case!

    4. Re:Prior art design by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      I agree that it is the point, but while media likes to focus on the drawings of rectangles (which is indeed ludicrous and worth a chuckle until you realize that it could viably be used as an argument in proceedings in Germany), it does stack up from the rectangle almost all the way up to the iPad's actual design.

      Samsung not being notified or having an opportunity to defend their case is par for the course for German proceedings. Think of the court cases that can be filed by any third party with no relationship to either the private individual/business who they are suing for, nor with the party being sued.

  21. Karma Begone by zixxt · · Score: 0, Troll

    Let me vent for one second please. FUCK APPLE!!!

    --
    ---- GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  22. Time to ditch my iPad by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and my Macs maybe close behind. I am not going to support a bunch of assholes like what Apple has become. I have used a friends Galaxy and found it a bit slow but Android does have features iOs sorely lacks. While I don't think the current tablet implementations are all that wonderful I believe they are good for getting people to rethink how to write and use applications. Apple apparently thinks they invented all of this and considering how the patent office works they could probably buy history to be on their side.

    Very disappointing to see this. Spend your money innovating not suing Apple. Be an ideas company, not one that stifles anyone else having them.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by Eggplant62 · · Score: 1

      I have never owned an Apple device. After the moves made in German courts this week by Apple against Samsung and Motorola, I never will. I hope many others will join me in a boycott of any and all Apple products.

    2. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm feeling the same about my Ipod the whole prevent competition being sold angle apples been using lately stinks and is bad for everyone. I also don't like how they colluded to raise ebook prices they just seem to be getting more and more evil and anti competitive.

      I respect Samsung as a company you can ussually trust their build quality

    3. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by egnx · · Score: 1

      Been there done that, gave my IPod away in disgust and put Linux on my Mac. Naturally Apple couldn't care less about that and only geeks will be interested at the moment. However they should care, I was trialling Apple hardware at work; the trial has been abandoned and when friends and colleagues ask my geek opinion I no longer recommend Apple.

    4. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      I wish I could not buy Apple products. Unfortunately as a developer, I have to develop for the platform and that involves having to have a Mac Mini (the cheapest one I could get) for building, which was actually a business purchase that I didn't make with my own personal money, but beyond that, I have not purchased Apple products in a long time (the only other things I ever bought were iPods when there were not better alternatives at a similar price, now I don't even use them as I prefer Rhapsody on my Galaxy S which has a better DAC anyway). Apple has always been about market control and being anti-competitive and has never been about consumer interest. That's been obvious since the 80s and became many times worse after iTunes.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    5. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      I just bought an HTC Desire S, my first Smartphone, instead of an iPhone - mainly because I have a moral problem with Apple. I actually thought the experience would be a little worse than an iPhone.

      Actually, I'm finding this thing smoother, more open, and NICER than my brother's iPhone! And, it's obviously cheaper than the iPhone 4 (what isn't?) I'm ultra-glad I didn't go with Apple now. Muahahaha.

    6. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by paimin · · Score: 2

      Because all the corporations in the Android ecosystem are not litigious assholes. They are kind, generous, and deeply care about the geeks and the hackers. :-|

      --
      Facebook is the new AOL
    7. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by Americano · · Score: 1, Funny

      "Join the Apple boycott now, and win a free iPad 2!"

    8. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word for you... Respect.

    9. Re:Time to ditch my iPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like a true fanboi.

  23. Florian Mueller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is ever single article posted on slashdot even remotely related to these companies cite Florian Mueller as a patent expert?

    Is it some sort of elaborate /. trolling?

  24. Misfiled, should be under "Funny" by Ant+P. · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How much are ComputerWorld/ITWorld paying to get this Mueller FUD campaign to the front page?

    I hope it's worth all the subscriptions they cost you guys.

    1. Re:Misfiled, should be under "Funny" by TrueSatan · · Score: 1

      Computer World/IT World have Microsoft and Apple as, almost unquestionably, their largest advertisers and it is pretty much beyond doubt that Microsoft and Apple pay a lot to Florian Mueller so perhaps your question would be better stated as "How much are Microsoft and Apple paying to get their FUD campaign to the front page".

    2. Re:Misfiled, should be under "Funny" by stevew · · Score: 1

      You are COMPLETELY correct about this guy. You can't trust ANYTHING he says - here is an example of what he said concerning PJ and Groklaw being paid by IBM back in the middle of the SCO lawsuits. He his completely unreliable as a reporter. He has an agenda that is transparent.

      http://techrights.org/2010/08/06/record-straight-on-groklaw-ibm/

      Maybe there IS a lawsuit between Apple and Mot in Germany. As others have mentioned, Mot is a BIG company and can take care of themselves. They do have fundamental technology in Cell phones, and many in radio technology. Apple just doesn't like competition, so they resort to lawsuits to clear the field for their milch-cow products. They're STILL whining about loss of the "look and feel" lawsuits over Windows 1 with Microsoft! ;-) They are just as anti-competitive as Microsoft.

      --
      Have you compiled your kernel today??
  25. "could cast a cloud over Android licensing." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No shit, that's the point.

  26. Forgot already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple recently bought 6000 patents from Nortel. A company founded in the 19 century and predates motorola with over 30 years!
    http://slashdot.org/story/11/07/01/1344205/Nortel-Patents-Go-To-Apple-Microsoft-Sony-and-Others

  27. Not in the Netherlands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... where we don't like anyone telling us what we can or cannot buy. Expecially Apple.

  28. Mot should square things... by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Maybe if all Mot screens were square, they could claim that as an innovation, further claiming that they had eliminated the concept of portrait/landscape viewing by doing this, and neatly sidestep Apple's objections. Or else, they could be difficult and make an elliptical screen

  29. APPHOLES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see how many mod points fanbois want to waste.

    FUCK APPLE. FUCK LIVER STEALING ASSHOLE STEVE JOBS. JUST DIE YOU APPHOLES.

    (Slashdot - yes I know I am yelling. )

  30. Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal by worf_mo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Reminds me of a blog post 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.

  31. Why no USB? by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Yeah, next to nobody seems to have USB. When Apple didn't put a floppy on their first iMacs, other vendors like E-machines did, and claimed that advantage. But this time, nobody has put USB ports - not Apple, not Mot... Had they put it, people could have attached their SSDs or HDDs and kept whatever data they wished to put there. Granted, given that the processor is just a 32-bit processor, the capacity of the HDD that could have been accessed would have been limited.

    1. Re:Why no USB? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Granted, given that the processor is just a 32-bit processor, the capacity of the HDD that could have been accessed would have been limited.

      buillshit.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:Why no USB? by chaboud · · Score: 1

      ssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..

      Let him talk. This is hilarious.

    3. Re:Why no USB? by energizer-bunny2 · · Score: 1

      Glad you said "next to nobody".

      I have an Acer Iconia A500, has a full sized USB and HDMI output.

      I've only used the USB a few times (keyboard and a thumb drive). When I did use the USB port I was very happy it was there!!

    4. Re:Why no USB? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Granted, given that the processor is just a 32-bit processor, the capacity of the HDD that could have been accessed would have been limited.

      Hello, PAE would like a few words with you.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    5. Re:Why no USB? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Oops, I read "disk" but saw "RAM".

      That being said, I've no trouble accessing the 2TB disk containing my video collection from a laptop that has a 32-bit CPU, so I'm still inclined to think you're full of baloney..

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    6. Re:Why no USB? by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Don't be ridiculous. Someone may have movies or music on an HDD and wants to be able to play them from the tablet. Or wants to sync their device through a standard off the shelf cable. Or wants to charge their device with the same cable and charger as works for virtually every other mobile device these days. Or wants to copy files to and from their tablet and a PC without special software. All extremely unreasonable demands right? Perhaps you love the way the iPad makes you use a proprietary connector and requires you to use a bloated piece of crap called iTunes. It doesn't mean everyone else does, especially when there is a widely adopted standard called USB which means they don't need to.

  32. Re:"Patent expert" or a "Troll" Florian Mueller by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  33. New Apple picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey Slashdot, if you insist on continuing to use the Microsoft Borg icon, then it's only fair that you use this icon for Apple.

    1. Re:New Apple picture by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I've been supporting this for a couple of years now. Also the MS logo need to have Steve Ballmer in it, Bill Gates doesn't even work there anymore.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  34. ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple can't go on filing lawsuits forever. At certain point this technology will get prevalent, it's the inescapable progress.

    Tony

  35. Re:"Patent expert" or a "Troll" Florian Mueller by olau · · Score: 0

    Only on Slashdot could a comment like parent have been modded Informative.

  36. Apples new business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you can't innovate - litigate.

  37. Motorola is Just Receiving What It Asked For by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Motorola sued Apple in October 2010 over a number of patents: http://mediacenter.motorola.com/Press-Releases/Motorola-Mobility-Sues-Apple-for-Patent-Infringement-344d.aspx.

    I'm not saying I'm supporting all this patent fighting but if you go after Apple, Apple will go after you.

    1. Re:Motorola is Just Receiving What It Asked For by mkdx · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought it's just Apple being the new patent system abuser. What you have typed would have been more believable if it weren't for the "few" other lawsuits Apple is waging against other Android products/manufacturers. Apple is scared that what happened with smart phone market will happen in tablet market, and will go after every Android tablet maker that show a potential to build a good tablet line.

    2. Re:Motorola is Just Receiving What It Asked For by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and that excuses them for going after samsung and htc?

  38. Is there any confirmation? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Does anyone here read German? All of the news stories about it quote each other with no independent confirmation. I mean unlike Groklaw which actually gets a copy of the lawsuit filing, can that be done in Germany? The other thing is it isn't clear if Apple is suing Motorola for design patents like they are Samsung. Also I wouldn't necessarily believe Florian Mueller. He always has spun everything negative that isn't Microsoft.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  39. Cork of permanent silencing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone needs to shove a cork up FM's arse, deep. That should shut them up as they're always talking out their arse!

  40. Why aren't they sueing in the US? by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

    i dont understand why they are picking on different countries and not the US

  41. Translation by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
    English translation:

    Apple: "The Xoom is also better than the iPad 2."

  42. The Bad Apple by pdfsmail · · Score: 1

    As i said in a previous articles post... At first I just was not an apple fan.. now I truly HATE apple. Take your crap somewhere else. You feel so threatened by Android you are running trying to get your mommy to fix it. Just eat this apple and poo it out... I hope the day comes - again - and you have the same thing happen to you, then go bankrupt for your atrocities. Btw I claim the rectangle... I remember drawing it on paper when I was a kid... and my mother still has the blueprints!

  43. Pure disinformation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get this FUD about Apple blocking the sales of Android 10.1'' tablets... Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 can be bought without problems all over the Europe (just search it on Amazon.de or .fr) and I doubt that going after Motorola will do any good to the company that believes their fame is guaranteed an infinite loop.

    And how can a German court really affect anything outside Germany, anyway? EU is not a single country, you know!

  44. Him Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Patent expert Florian Mueller

    Isn't this the same person that said SCOx own LINUX??

  45. LG's design by future+assassin · · Score: 1
    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  46. "Patent expert Florian Mueller"!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    an oxymoron if ever I've seen one... Please do NOT give this idiot the veneer of experthood... he's an out and out Microsoft shill

  47. Would apple sue me if my app by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

    either on android or any apple platform, performed visual techniques that mimic things on the apple products..things like the dock, where icons would zoom in or out(or grow larger or smaller) when scrolling horizontally or vertically, page layouts etc etc. Basically I am working on a graphics engine for my mobile apps that are being written in OpenGL for these special efftects. I wouldn't think and don't think that it would be an issue - obviously my implementation of any visual technique is going to be different.

    1. Re:Would apple sue me if my app by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Apple does have a patent on bouncy scrolling. They may have patents on other interactions too.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    2. Re:Would apple sue me if my app by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

      what about icons sliding across the screen? or a set/page of icons? if they had a patent on every little iconism then no one could write their own implementation. I hadn't planned on imitating an icon bouncing when opening an application. I was more referring to the fluidity of icons on pages, between pages, etc in response to mouse or touch interactions and as far as i know, no one has patents on touch interactions, with the exception to their respective implementations. I dont see any reason why i cannot implement my own graphics 'engine' that represents something 'unique' in the mobile space arena.

    3. Re:Would apple sue me if my app by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Supposedly one of the current patents in the lawsuits is over a grid of icons. Possibly just a square grid? You could maybe go for a hex grid like some of the later Windows Mobile 6.5 variations. Nothing very specific here, but maybe it helps. http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/04/bad-touchwiz-apple-sues-samsung-for-patent-violations.ars

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
  48. Go on, Apple....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stifle the competition all you like. I won't be buying your shiny "products" any time soon.

  49. Re:Time to ditch my iPa by fermion · · Score: 2
    Except that motorola is on record as condemning the type of behavior asserting in the lawsuit. Back in 2005 or so Motorola successfully prevented an Asian company from selling phones that looked vaguely liked the Razr. The phones were only sold in Asia and were not called a razor. They were cheap knockoffs that did not appear to violate any trademarks. So if you want to ditch you iPad, you can't go to motorola.

    Furthermore it is unclear if Samsung is not a thief, after all they paid nearly a billion after stealing Rambus technology

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  50. Bubble as a business model by boorack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think Apple is becoming desperate. As their market capitalization approached (and even surpassed for a moment) Exxon-Mobile market cap, they're now officially in bubble terrirory. At first glance it does not seem like a bubble as their P/E ratio isn't so high (around 14 as we speak), but their current profits is clearly a bubble thanks to fat profit margins. Most of their profits come from iPhones and iPads - all remaining revenue sources pale in comparison to these two. As they're getting more and more real competition in market they've created, they'll have to compete and they'll experience significant margin compression. In other words, if any real competition emerges, they'll lose support for their insanely high stock price. Don't get me wrong - I don't predict any kind of doom for Apple - I just say that their current stock price is unsupportable in long term.

    My take is that they'll fight teeth and nail to keep any meaningful competition out of the market - legally or not. In Samsung case they've got too far - now it appears that they've managed to get injunction without even notifying Samsung about this, so Samsung lawyers had no chance to even respond. This is propably illegal, but it seems that Apple is prepared to pay very high fines/damages in order to keep monopoly on tablet market.

    It also strikes me that previously they've always managed to get ahead of competitors in terms of new, better products and now they started using lawyers on grand scale. Why is that ? Is it because of Jobs' deteriorating health their product/innovation pipeline is shortening ? If the only person capable if envisioning a new product in this company is Steve Jobs, then they're a kind of one-time wonder.

    1. Re:Bubble as a business model by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Is it because of Jobs' deteriorating health their product/innovation pipeline is shortening ?

      I'm not sure I'd go for Steve's deteriorating health.

      Some of it is just plain ol' competition. When the iPhone first came out, everybody was in awe. This was seen as being head-and-shoulders above everybody else. By the time the iPhone 3G came out, Android was getting started and was a bit flaky but the hardware parts had been figured out. By the time the iPhone 4 came out, the Android hardware was easily there and the software was catching up fast. When the next generation iPhone comes out, it will sport hardware that has been in Android phones for the last six months and "Ice Cream Sandwich" will be more than a match for iOS 5.

      That's what happens when you have lots of companies competing. Apple goes it's own way in it's own time and customers have to sit and wait. Meanwhile, HTC comes out with a good phone, Motorola comes out with great phone, Samsung comes out with an awesome phone, HTC comes out with the awesomest phone, Motorola comes out with a more awesomest phone, etc. Meanwhile Apple is sitting in it's own little pond plodding along and delivering updates once a year.

  51. Turning point? by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

    So is this the official turning point of Apple from a product innovator to a run of the mill "I'm going to sue anyone and everyone so I don't have to put money into R&D to make better products!" company?

    Seems like it... when was the last time Apple came out with something innovative? iPad 1 I'd say. iPhone 5 is shaping up to be more of the same, iPad 2 is more of the same. Macbooks, more of the same... Can't think of anything recently that Apple came up with that others aren't doing already or doing better in some cases.

    The iPad 2 is so lackluster that Apple is scared the Tab and Xoom might prove to be more popular with consumers since it is at least on par and in some cases exceeds the iPad 2 in functionality.

    It's a shame Motorola and Samsung are charging so much... if they dropped the price by a couple hundred bucks...

  52. It won't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the Galaxy Tab is still for sale in Europe, I can buy one right now, so the previous ban didn't work, why should this ban work?
    What are Apple scared of? Why don't they innovate instead of alienate?

  53. Stop Quoting Florian Mueller by sfcrazy · · Score: 1

    Can you please stop quoting and independent blogger with no credentials and bias toward FOSS, who has been often exposed by Groklaw as FUDester. Use real news sources or experts. You guys are turning that troll into a legend. Please stop that.