Share this Story

Judge Throws Out Apple v. Motorola Lawsuit Over “Unfair” Licensing Practicies

Remember last week, when we reported that Apple was only willing to pay $1 to Motorola for every iPhone sold over use of the Google-owned company’s patents? The lawsuit involving that report has now been tossed out by a judge in Wisconsin. Apple’s initial complaint that Google and Motorola were unfairly trying to license their patents in question has been shut down “with prejudice” by the judge. That means that the case is done at the trial court level, but can still be appealed, something Apple will likely do.


Via:  Reuters | FOSS Patents

Cheers Cory and everyone else who sent this in!

  • Jon Gee

    I still think that all of this patent mess is stupid but on the other hand… Apple, it’s called KARMA. Steve understood the concept in the beginning.

  • Heh, Apple, unfair, heh.

  • master94

    lol, this means Moto can legally force Apple to pay whatever Moto wants or ban the device if Apple doesn’t agree to, Happy Days are here again.

  • mike.s

    Source: FOSS Patents? All credibility instantly lost. No one quotes Florian Mueller, except as an example of a shill.

  • chris125

    Good to see Judges are beginning to see Apple trying to work and abuse the system. They need to get what they deserve. $1 is a ridiculously low amount when they were asking $30+ per samsung device.

    • MicroNix

      That’s right Apple sit down right here and spin!

  • John

    1 dollar is good, that would double their cost to make an iphone. Then again, they’ll probably make their factory’s workers pay for it.

  • I’m confused!

    Apple was the one in the wrong saying they would only give $1 per device in order to license patents which are ESSENTIAL to the way the iPhone works (making them IMO worth more than $1 per device) so instead of being professional and reasonable they went to the feds claiming that Motorola was being uncooperative with licensing deals?

    That has to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard of in my life!

    • Because its essential to work, it means the licensing fee would be lower than non-essential things. Since Apple wanted Samsung to pay $30/phone for their patents, I can’t imagine it looks good for Apple. That high price tag may be coming back to bite them in the ass.

      • I hope it turns around and bites them real hard! But in the end knowing Apple it would just hurt the consumer in the end. Instead of Apple taking the licensing fee out of their profit margin they will just raise the prices of their iDevices to accomodate.

        • EC8CH

          Apple will push it onto the carriers to cover through their subsidies. Then the carriers will roll it into their continued squeezing of their customers.

          • Hopefully with the launch of the Nexus 4 people will realize that they don’t *HAVE* to sign contracts and deal with abusive carriers just to get the phone they want. Hopefully it will also wake people up to realize a phone should NEVER cost over $600!

          • EC8CH

            No doubt… If I could buy an N4 on VZW Google would have my money, even without LTE. But alas, I’m stalking used GNex’s on ebay.

          • lol I’ve got my eye on the upcoming Droid DNA (or DLX whatever you wanna call it). I just hope I can get $200-$300 for my used Droid Razr with accessories to help pay for the DNA off contract (gotta keep that unlimited data if it’s gonna have a 1080p display!!!). Too bad HTC and Verizon won’t follow Google’s $299 pricing model!

          • Daistaar

            While I completely agree with the logic on the unlimited data, I don’t anything is going to be streamed in 1080p.

          • Justin Swanson

            Broadcast HDTV is only 720p

          • Mike

            No. A lot of stations broadcast in 1080i as well.

          • Justin Swanson

            I stand corrected.

          • Hopefully YouTube videos and possibly Netflix will support it but other than that I will be mostly using content streamed / downloaded from DropBox and even tTorrent to give all those pixels a workout! I mainly just want all those pixels to game on. I am HIGHLY ADDICTED to Dead Trigger (yes, I know it is old but its still good especially with the Tegra hack to make the Tegra graphics work on all devices), ShadowGun, and the list goes on! Plus when I had my Rezound I loved being able to playback the videos / pictures I captured in full HD, especially the ones taken with HDR! The pictures seemed to jump off of the display!

          • Ryan Granger

            Unless you’re only a few(2-4) inches away from the screen all the time you won’t be able to see any difference. Even then it’s questionable.

          • lol I’ve got my eye on the upcoming Droid DNA (or DLX whatever you wanna call it). I just hope I can get $200-$300 for my used Droid Razr with accessories to help pay for the DNA off contract (gotta keep that unlimited data if it’s gonna have a 1080p display!!!). Too bad HTC and Verizon won’t follow Google’s $299 pricing model!

          • michael arazan

            That’s where the $30 upgrade fee was for by verizon, reported by many sites, to help cover the subsidized iphone. You think vzw would have paid attention to how much money ATT lost with subsidized iphones before selling them a year ago..

        • Yes they would raise the prices of the consumers. Yet the idiots would still flock to pay it.

        • michael arazan

          Karma is a Bitch Apple, welcome to the beginning of your reckonning

  • user311

    I guess apple didn’t foresee buying out the judges in Wisconsin too.

    • They are already bought and paid for by the government unions.

  • bako

    If Apple doesn’t get a license it will face an injunction!
    Wow this just got really hot!

  • Why will Apple appeal against that decision when they were the ones being asked to pay?

    • DanWazz

      Apple still has to pay. The suit was from Apple saying that Motorola’s/Google’s licensing practices were/are unfair.

    • 1bens

      Apple wanted to set a $1/device max on the going forward with licensing with the court’s ruling. Essentially Apple wanted the court to assist setting a FRAND license fee it would pay Motorola ONLY if it didn’t go above that $1 rate. The judge said no, I’m not playing your game.

      But it’s just Apple being snobby Apple…. “we’ll play along with the court if I we use our rules.”

    • nightscout13

      Because Motorola was asking $2.50 per device, but Apple counter offered $1 per device. ( I think)

      • Velmeran

        Motorola’s initial request (or the starting price in negotiations that never happened) was for 2.25% (or about $13 per device)

  • 1st MOTO FTW ! ! !