Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Files Suit Against Motorola Xoom In EU

Posted by samzenpus on from the when-in-doubt-sue dept.

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."

12 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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 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
  4. Nice one Apple by mormop · · Score: 5, Informative

    Good to see no hypocrisy here then:

    http://www.skuggen.com/2010/03/apple-ceo-steve-jobs-we-steal-great-ideas-shamelessly/

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08/apple_copies_rejected_app/

    --
    Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
  5. "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?

  6. 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.

  7. 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/

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.