6 posts in this topic

Posted

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) - A federal judge on Monday tossed out an Apple lawsuit accusing Google-owned Motorola Mobility of trying to charge the iPhone maker too much for licenses to essential technology for mobile devices.

US District Court Judge Barbara Crabb dismissed the case after a week of pre-trial legal wrangling that evidently convinced her that the matter was headed for prolonged litigation instead of earnest resolution.

Apple filed suit against Motorola Mobility early last year after Motorola claimed it was due 2.25 percent royalty on sales of devices powered by iOS software, using patented Wi-Fi and video technology.

Apple argued that the price was too high because the technology was in a category considered industry-essential and therefore had to be licensed under terms that are "fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory" (FRAND).

Crabb sided with Apple regarding the FRAND status of the Motorola technology but dismissed the case on Monday, when the trial was to begin, after Apple placed conditions on whether it would accept license terms set by the judge.

"The case cannot proceed to trial on the remaining issue; case dismissed," Crabb wrote in her ruling.

Apple can appeal the judge's decision.

Motorola Mobility said in a statement, ""We're pleased that the court has dismissed Apple's lawsuit with prejudice. Motorola has long offered licensing to our extensive standards-essential patent portfolio at a reasonable and non-discriminatory rate in line with industry standards. We remain interested in reaching an agreement with Apple."

Apple did not respond to an AFP request for comment.







[url="http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/15307340/us-judge-tosses-apple-suit-against-motorola/"]http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/15307340/us-judge-tosses-apple-suit-against-motorola/[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So Apple thought they could control the judge? Lol.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Growled' timestamp='1352166432' post='595299705']
So Apple thought they could control the judge? Lol.
[/quote]

Well, they do control one judge, and her name is Lucy 'Apple' Koh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Asrokhel' timestamp='1352166521' post='595299711']
Well, they do control one judge, and her name is Lucy 'Apple' Koh!
[/quote]

They obviously didn't pay this one enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Did Apple not learn their lesson yet?
[right]http://www.connectw.me[/right]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Lets see what Apple cries about next. Remember, it is only unfair if Apple doesnt get their way. Hope they lose the appeal as well. Maybe they will stop being the bully so much and learn to place nice with others...doubt it but one can hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.