Court decision: Motorola Mobility (aka Google) does not infringe Apple patents
For Google, the time has come quite successful in litigation related to the Android operating system. Previously, the court ruled that Google does not use patents from Oracle, and then that does not violate the intellectual property of the same company in the Java API. Now, Chicago federal court judge Richard Posner dismissed Apple Inc.’s lawsuit. against Google's subsidiary, Motorola Mobility.
With this decision, a federal judge in the state of Illinois summed up the two-year standoff between Apple and Motorola Mobility. In the fall of 2010, Motorola (another entire corporation before the division on Solutions and Mobility) filed a lawsuit against Apple, in which it accused the latter of violating its patents. A few days later, a counterclaim was registered, in which Apple accused Motorola of the same sins. After the division of Motorola Inc., the claims were annulled, the courts were postponed, the charges were dropped, and as a result of the proceedings went to Richard Posner.
The judge was initially skeptical of the claims of both companies. The fact is that Richard is a critic of the US patent system and considers it inoperative. Therefore, he strongly insisted that companies settle their claims out of court. But Apple and Motorola lawyers couldn’t come to any compromise decision, after which the judge gave an ultimatum - either the companies are looking for an agreement with each other, or he stops the case. In order to back up his words with something weighty, he signed on June 7 a decree on the preliminary annulment of the Apple suit. And on June 22 the decision came into full force.
The judge described the actions of the companies as stupid, said that no company had provided any evidence of the seriousness of the damage, so any claims to block imports of products into the US are groundless. Posner also stated that:
The judge rejected Apple’s requirement to temporarily block Motorola’s imports to remove illegally used technologies, arguing that even if such a decision is issued, compliance checks will require significant administrative resources and create complex bureaucratic obstacles:
The judge also noted that the operating system and the entire hardware product in the aggregate are the most complex technological device, so some small violations in some component cannot be a condition for blocking sales.
According to the results of the court, the following key decisions can be identified:
Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet declined to comment on this decision, while Motorola Mobilty spokeswoman Jennifer Erickson said the company was pleased with the court decision.
The full text of the decision can be found here .
With this decision, a federal judge in the state of Illinois summed up the two-year standoff between Apple and Motorola Mobility. In the fall of 2010, Motorola (another entire corporation before the division on Solutions and Mobility) filed a lawsuit against Apple, in which it accused the latter of violating its patents. A few days later, a counterclaim was registered, in which Apple accused Motorola of the same sins. After the division of Motorola Inc., the claims were annulled, the courts were postponed, the charges were dropped, and as a result of the proceedings went to Richard Posner.
The judge was initially skeptical of the claims of both companies. The fact is that Richard is a critic of the US patent system and considers it inoperative. Therefore, he strongly insisted that companies settle their claims out of court. But Apple and Motorola lawyers couldn’t come to any compromise decision, after which the judge gave an ultimatum - either the companies are looking for an agreement with each other, or he stops the case. In order to back up his words with something weighty, he signed on June 7 a decree on the preliminary annulment of the Apple suit. And on June 22 the decision came into full force.
The judge described the actions of the companies as stupid, said that no company had provided any evidence of the seriousness of the damage, so any claims to block imports of products into the US are groundless. Posner also stated that:
Apple’s suggestion that any potential patent infringement by Google damaged market share, brand recognition or customer loyalty is a completely wild hypothesis
The judge rejected Apple’s requirement to temporarily block Motorola’s imports to remove illegally used technologies, arguing that even if such a decision is issued, compliance checks will require significant administrative resources and create complex bureaucratic obstacles:
Because of the possible costs of the federal judicial system to control Motorola, I cannot issue a ruling to please Apple.
The judge also noted that the operating system and the entire hardware product in the aggregate are the most complex technological device, so some small violations in some component cannot be a condition for blocking sales.
According to the results of the court, the following key decisions can be identified:
- All Apple’s patent claims against Motorola Mobility are rejected
- Apple is not allowed to ban the import of Motorola devices into the US
- Apple is prohibited from filing a patent claim against Motorola for three months
- Motorola Mobility is prohibited to prohibit the importation of Apple devices into the US
- Companies are allowed to appeal the decision to a higher authority.
Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet declined to comment on this decision, while Motorola Mobilty spokeswoman Jennifer Erickson said the company was pleased with the court decision.
The full text of the decision can be found here .
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/146410/
All Articles