Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Slams Apple-Motorola Suit As 'Business Strategy'

Posted by timothy on from the stating-the-obvious dept.

jfruh writes "Faced with an Apple vs. Motorola lawsuit that involves 180 claims and counterclaims across 12 patents, a judge in Florida has thrown up his hands and accused both companies of acting in bad faith. Claiming the parties' were engaged in 'obstreperous and cantankerous conduct', he said that the lawsuit was part of 'a business strategy that appears to have no end.'"

10 of 140 comments (clear)

  1. Good by drinkydoh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fighting is stupid. You should just concentrate on making a great product, just like Apple does. Note that, Motorola/Google, and stop fighting.

  2. Referee hates players for participating in game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He is entirely correct. But this is what the US patent and court system has brought things to. There is no substantial downside to patent litigation for companies of this size. Even if you lose, you win, because you've forced your competitor through the legal defense ordeal.

    1. Re:Referee hates players for participating in game by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Patents and Copyright are Government granted temporary monopoly's over that which has been patented or is under copyright.
      Was originally granted to spur more creation of these things to enrich the public domain.
      Problem is the temporary part has been massively subverted. Now almost nothing ever makes it into the public domain.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  3. No sir by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is he implying that Apple's business strategy is somehow tied into massive, pervasive, and obvious patent trolling? No sir, simply won't buy it. Everyone knows they invented rounded corners.

    --
    I got here through a series of tubes
  4. I would have thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    that the judge blurting out what is obvious to anyone following the case is a clear violation of protocol.

  5. And? by spyke252 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until we see punishment for such business practices, they'll continue to be profitable. As long as they're profitable, companies will continue to use such business practices. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that judges are also seeing the idiocy that certain policies seem to lead to, but given how these companies sometimes even blatantly disregard the courts... They'll just find a different patent and sue in a different court system until they get their money back.

  6. Motorola? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't see how Motorola's using the lawsuit as a business strategy. They didn't file it, they don't want to be in court, and they have no choice about showing up or about what claims they have to defend against. I'm getting more and more annoyed at judges who get mad at defendants for having the temerity to stand up and defend themselves against the claims the plaintiff has made. If their defenses are meritless, then just rule so and be done with it. If they aren't meritless, then the blame for any complexity lies with the party making the claims, not the defense.

    1. Re:Motorola? by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can't see how Motorola's using the lawsuit as a business strategy. They didn't file it, they don't want to be in court, and they have no choice about showing up or about what claims they have to defend against. I'm getting more and more annoyed at judges who get mad at defendants for having the temerity to stand up and defend themselves against the claims the plaintiff has made. If their defenses are meritless, then just rule so and be done with it. If they aren't meritless, then the blame for any complexity lies with the party making the claims, not the defense.

      The summary is wrong.

      It's Motorola Mobility v. Apple, not Apple v. Motorola Mobility.

      Motorola filed a lawsuit against Apple over patent violations in 2010, and expanded it in 2011 (with Google's permission as the Motorola-Google acquisition happened in the meantime) over more patents. Apple then charged Motorola (then) with patent violations as well.

        Motorola Mobility LLC v. Apple Inc., 12cv20271, U.S. District Court for the District of Florida (Miami)

    2. Re:Motorola? by Moses48 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Look here for the timeline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars
      This list just shows who started what:
      Nokia sues apple, apple counters, and nokia counters, etc.
      Apple sues HTC, counters, etc
      (HTC gives royalties to microsoft... WTF?)
      S3 sues Apple
      Oracle sues google, oracle fails!
      Microsoft sues Motorolla, countered etc.
      Motorolla sues Apple, countered etc.
      Microsoft sues Barnes and Nobles
      Apple sues Samsung, countered
      Microsoft grabs more royalties from those without patent arsenal (le sigh)

      And that is a little rundown of where we are at.

  7. New Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The judge should ask Apple if it plans to be in business 200 years from today.
    When Apple says yes, the judge should suspend the suit and schedule another hearing in 100 years.
    To an immortal corporation, a "speedy trial" can easily be measured in centuries.