Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Preliminary ITC Ruling: Motorola Not In Violation of Apple's Patents

Posted by Unknown on from the obvious-things-might-be-obvious dept.

SpuriousLogic writes with a preliminary ruling in the ITC case between Apple and Motorola. Quoting eWeek: "Motorola is celebrating an initial triumph over Apple, after a U.S. International Trade Commission administrative law judge issued an initial determination (PDF) finding that Motorola Mobility has not violated any of the three patents listed in an October 2010 lawsuit Apple filed against the Droid maker. ... The determination isn't the final say ... in March, the ruling will be reviewed by a six-member ITC panel that will announce the ultimate ruling. However, according to Zacks Equity Research, it's unusual for the ITC panel, which has the power to block device imports, to contradict a judge's determination."

6 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Mebbe Tim Kooks won't get the 378Million after all by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hope that this will be the first of many many defeats Apple will face in the future

    I've had enough of patent trolling, no matter if it comes from Microsoft or Apple

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  2. Courts are becoming more efficient. by mjwx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I remember a time where companies would get 3 or 4 years of quality FUD out of a false patent claim. All Apple got were a few months and some Florian Mueller posts. I'd be asking for my money back, at least from Mueller.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  3. Re:iLawyer 4G by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The constant litigation between Apple and [insert every other phone manufacturer] is not only holding back innovation

    Really? Because I see a whole bunch of new phones at CES. Do you have any evidence that innovation is being held back, or is this just a gut "but it must be so" feeling?

    There are/were a bunch of countries with Samsung tablet unavailability because of Apple-requested injunctions. It's usually hard to point at the status quo and make a good case for what would have been if only something else had happened, so I think that's pretty solid evidence for the GP's claim.

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  4. Re:iLawyer 4G by imnotanumber · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure, that litigation holds back sales and marketplace competition... But "and by extent innovation"? How does litigation over an existing product in any way affect innovation regarding new products? Can you logically support that extension you're proposing?

    That is easy. How much time do you think it takes to develop a product if you have to pass several design aspects through the opinions of IP Lawyers and iterate until it is accepted?

    If the fear of litigation exists because of what happened to previous products it is natural that new products will be delayed because you have to try to design around stupid patents.

  5. Re:Bribes? by siddesu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Newton resolved this flamewar coupla hundreds of years ago, apparently said something about standing, shoulders, giants. And it was not Apple's Newton, mind you.

  6. Apple does not innovate period by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The iPhone was a huge success, and that's great. But it does not mean that Apple invented the smart phone. And it certainly does not mean that Apple invented every technology included in an iPhone - such as color icons.

    That is something that Apple, and Apple zealots, pretend they don't understand.