4 ms·
I think the more interesting part is that Apple applied for a stay pending appeal and were denied. I'm probably going to need to read the reasons directly to fi
by ABCLAW 8y ago
I think the more interesting part is that Apple applied for a stay pending appeal and were denied. I'm probably going to need to read the reasons directly to figure out how Qualcomm managed to get that done.
- gmueckl 8y agoAs far as I understand it, this is a temporary injunction. These are granted by weighing the damage that would be done to the plaintiff without it against the damage that would be done to the defendant if it were wrongly granted for the duration of the actual proceedings.
- ABCLAW 8y agoNormally injunctive relief of this type is awarded in the event that there is irreperable harm, but Qualcomm could be compensated by a per-unit license fee + penalty damage award on sold infringing items. That's why I'm surprised. Still haven't had time to look at the reasons, though. Travelling for the holiday so I'm a bit behind.
- gmueckl 8y agoI think that German courts are much quicker to to grant injunctions than e.g. the US.