11 ms·
Google Sues Apple, Seeks To Block iPhone, iPad & Mac Imports To U.S.
- indiecore 14y agoWe all knew that the second someone started wielding their "defensive" patents the whole system was going to fall apart. Well...here we go I guess.
- simcop2387 14y agoYep, someone decided that MAD was worth it or that they could win. It certainly looks like it's going to be a fun time for the lawyers and people with popcorn. So far we've got Apple suing Motorola, Motorola suing back. Apple suing Samsung, and now Google suing Apple. Any others I've missed?
- vasco 14y agoI guess in the end IBM would come into the room and shut everyone up.
- sigkill 14y agoHonest question, why? Don't most of the phones run on ARM? Or did you imply something on the lines of PC (or the POWER architecture)? /clueless
- option_greek 14y agoGo to any tech retail outlet, close your eyes and randomly touch any of the products they sell. I'm sure IBM has at least one patent covering it. The fact that they were here for a very long time and do a lot of pure science research means they are ahead of patent game than most. Here's one story about Sun shakedown in 80's http://www.osnews.com/story/24987/Microsoft_s_Android_Shakedown_IBM_Did_It_First http://www.osnews.com/story/24987/Microsoft_s_Android_Shaked...
- mdwrigh2 14y agoThis is Motorola suing Apple again, for the record.
- tedunangst 14y agoIf Google owns Motorola, they could put a stop to this if they wanted to, no?
- Mythbusters 14y agoand why would they? It's not that they vowed to do no evil or something.
- ok_craig 14y ago"Don't be evil" doesn't mean sit back and get sued to oblivion by your competitors like a selfless martyr.
- barista 14y agoDon't be evil means use your patents as a defense not to sue others. It means amass a big enough trove that others feel that suing you is going to be futile. Evil is attacking the opponent with the new patents you just "bought" not even developed in-house
- mdwrigh2 14y ago> Don't be evil means use your patents as a defense not to sue others. It means amass a big enough trove that others feel that suing you is going to be futile. Well, when a company is suing all of the companies that use your software over your software, but don't come after you, what are you supposed to do to protect them? Because obviously the "trove" wasn't "big enough". > Evil is attacking the opponent with the new patents you just "bought" not even developed in-house So now companies aren't allowed to use the patents of the companies they've purchased? Should patents be invalidated once the original company is acquired? I'm against software patents in general, but to argue, under the existing system, that one of your subsidiary's shouldn't be allowed to use the patents they developed because you acquired them seems absurd.
- fellowniusmonk 14y agoSomeone? I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this. - Steve Jobs
- haldean 14y agoThe headline is incorrect; this is Motorola suing Apple, not Google, which has happened before (as the article states).
- Mythbusters 14y agoRight. Google and Motorola are too separate corporate entities.
- notatoad 14y ago(afaik) what makes this newsworthy is that this is the first lawsuit filed by motorola since it was purchased by google
- drgath 14y agoIn a literal sense, you are correct. But don't ignore the fact that there had to be a group of lawyers and execs in a room at the GooglePlex that gave this move a green light. This is why Google bought Motorola.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- neurotech1 14y agoApple are suing Motorola(Google), so this lawsuit is just another part of the response directed back at Apple. It's not like Motorola just decided to go after another cellphone manufacturer for patent violations, as an offensive move.
- jsz0 14y agoThey did actually. 2010, Oct 06: Motorola sues Apple over 18 patents, and files an ITC complaint against Apple over 6 of them. 2010, Oct 29: Apple sues Motorola over 6 patents, and files an ITC complaint against Motorola over 3 of them.
- vibrunazo 14y agoGoogle only closed the Motorola acquisition in 2012.
- vng 14y agoIt's about time.
- zschallz 14y agoWhy is it okay for Google to do it but not say, Oracle? It's ridiculous no matter who does it.
- mingramjr 14y agoBecause Apple attacked first
- tedunangst 14y agoWait, Apple sued Google?
- andybak 14y agoEssentially, yes.
- cheald 14y agoApple is waging a war by proxy on Google via attacks on Android handset manufacturers. They've mostly avoided direct engagement so far (which is smart, since Google isn't the one making money directly from Android), but it's obvious to anyone watching the overall swing of these lawsuits that Apple isn't waging war on HTC or Samsung as much as they are on Google and Android.
- azylman 14y agoApple has sued Google-owned Motorola and Android handset manufacturers, so yes. Now Google-owned Motorola is suing back.
- sbuk 14y agoMotorola filled suit first.
- coryl 14y agoAnyone know what the eventual end game of all these lawsuits will be? Will everyone just end up carrying on and suing for the next few decades?
- barista 14y agoRich patent lawyers?
- arkitaip 14y agoDid Google acquire Motorola just to prepare its patent arsenal?
- MartinCron 14y agoIt's impossible to know from the outside, but there was a lot of conjecture about that.
- mikeryan 14y agoThat acquisition made a lot of strategic sense for a variety of reasons.. Not the least of which is their core business in producing phones and even for that matter cable set top boxes (see Google Fiber). That being said the IP was surely a significant factor.
- Mythbusters 14y agoIf there was any doubt about it in the past, it should be put to rest now.
- jongraehl 14y ago"just"
- chestercheetaz 14y agoyes.
- akurilin 14y agoIt's good to be a patent attorney these days.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoMaybe it's a patent litigation bubble :-)
- fpgeek 14y agoIt isn't a bubble. Until Congress and/or the courts change the rules, the fundamentals are very, very strong.
- rustynails 14y agoThe fundamentals of patents may be very strong, but IIRC, the same does not apply to software patents, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_States_patent_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_S... IIRC, this discussion still needs to take place. I really, really hope that software patents are knocked on the head, unless there is true science, such as a complex algorithm, which should have a limited life of a few years AT MOST, otherwise my litmus test of "harm to society" is met.
- mdwrigh2 14y agoJust to be clear, this Motorola suing Apple, and it's not the first time they've done so. I think The Verge has a much less linkbait-y headline for this: "Motorola files new patent case against Apple with ITC, wants import ban on iPhone and iPad" [1] [1]: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/17/3250656/motorola-files-new-patent-case-against-apple-with-itc http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/17/3250656/motorola-files-new...
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Mythbusters 14y agoYes. It's Motorola suing Apple and Not Google. Google, the current owner of Motorola has nothing to do with this. Just like Romney had nothing to do with what the other executives at Bain Capital did.
- mdwrigh2 14y agoI'm not trying to suggest that Google has nothing to do with this, they obviously do, but I think saying that Motorola is suing them using Motorola patents is more accurate. Anyone paying attention to this field would know that Motorola is a Google subsidiary these days, and the verge even states that in the article. Anyways, the "Google sues Apple" headline just seemed picked because it would draw more clicks rather than for accuracy.
- joelrunyon 14y agoDoes anybody else feel all the tech giants standing around with their patents in hand is like all the characters standing around with guns like at the end of Reservoir Dogs? "Nobody innovate or we'll shoot!" It's intriguing at first, but you can only keep it up so long before the plot line gets annoying because no one is doing anything (or innovating), or someone gets shot.
- larsberg 14y agoIIRC, big companies used to claim they were gathering these patents to _prevent_ this situation from happening, using a similar logic to that of hoarding nuclear weapons to mutually assured destruction. But it appears that something in the balance has changed, and I'm not really sure what. Are the lawyers just doing a bad job of agreeing on the licensing fees (i.e. penalty for having less cross-targeted bombs for a given opponent)? It's hard to know what to make of it all, putting myself in the shoes of an exec at one of these large companies. At least when I was at MSFT, we used to worry about this thing called "bad press" around lawsuits of this kind...
- Lewisham 14y agoWhat changed was that Nokia was on the rocks, so they launched their missiles. And, as is the way with mutually assured destruction scenarios, Apple responded, and everyone else got dragged in one way or another.
- tsotha 14y agoYep, MAD only works until the first guy pulls the trigger.
- niels_olson 14y agoRef: World War One
- rmc 14y agoBut it appears that something in the balance has changed, and I'm not really sure what. Google are trying to stop software patents by actually using the ones they have? Force a meltdown?
- ktizo 14y agoI think it is part of a plan to destroy western society by locking up all the courts and government with unanswerable questions such as "Who first thought of the rectangle?". Soon, there will be nothing left but a wasteland and some lawyers arguing over who gets to own half a dead cat while they warm their hands on oil drums full of burning currency.
- caf 14y agoOr maybe it's a cunning plan to save western society by locking up all the courts and government?
- ktizo 14y agoCould be either. Or even both. Is very hard to tell with cunning plans.
- viraptor 14y agoGood idea. Although the highest European courts are already pretty busy sorting out other burning issues. Like VAT exemptions for golf-club non-members (http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/august/ecj-to-rule-on-whether-green-fees-charged-to-non-members-of-golf-clubs-should-be-exempt-from-vat/ http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/august/ecj-to-rule-o...)
- ktizo 14y agoSo, presumably a lobbyist working at the EU now has a new golf membership.
- narrator 14y agoThis whole patent thing is turning Hobbes' hypothetical "War of All Against All" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omnes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omnes) into reality.
- WildUtah 14y ago
- noamsml 14y agoOn the one hand, lawsuits are bad and innovation is good. On the other hand, I'm happy to see Google defend its ecosystem against Apple's square-with-rounded-corner lawsuits.
- grandalf 14y agoEven though I'm generally in favor of moderately strong patent laws, this is starting to get ridiculous. The statute of limitations on these sorts of things should be 1-2 years max.
- naner 14y agoGoogle (through Motorola) is using Apple's tactics against them. Google/Motorola tried to do the same thing with Microsoft only to have Microsoft cry foul over FRAND (which isn't applicable in the case with Apple). It is a dirty tactic but this is the system Microsoft and Apple and many other large tech companies lobbied for.
- sciwiz 14y agoLooks like Motorola is trying with what seem to be non-FRAND related patents. (non 3G/4G related) "Motorola Mobility unit said it filed a new patent-infringement case against Apple Inc. (AAPL) claiming that features on some Apple devices, including the Siri voice-recognition program, infringe its patents. The complaint at the U.S. International Trade Commission claims infringement of seven Motorola Mobility patents on features including location reminders, e-mail notification and phone/video players" http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-17/google-s-motorola-files-new-patent-case-against-apple-at-itc.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-17/google-s-motorola-f...
- naner 14y agoYes, I know. I was referring to the earlier case against Microsoft concerning h264 patents. I didn't mean to imply the same thing would happen here. I edited the post in an attempt to make it clear.
- ezesolares 14y agoWTF with people still quoting FOSS Patents Florian Mueller... that guy can be bought easily. He has no integrity
- neya 14y agohahahah! I used to have enormous respect for him in the early days, later he and his blog turned into sh*t, so I stopped considering any of his opinions. He's like MG Seigler, but into Law and stuff.
- nell 14y agoForget about Apple and Google's vendor lock-in strategy. The American Bar Association has something better up its sleeves to get paid regularly.
- viraptor 14y agoIn a perfect world Apple, Google, Samsung, HTC, Motorola and Blackberry achieve what they wanted - none of them can produce or sell mobile devices anymore in any country. Meanwhile Nokia restarts production of quality hardware and puts WebOS on them with compatibility layer allowing to use legacy iOS and Android applications, taking over the leader position... (In a Bizarro World, it's Siemens bringing back Symbian)
- ktsmith 14y agoNokia was at the forefront of this mess.
- malkarouri 14y ago(In a Bizarro World, it's Siemens bringing back Symbian) OMG
- crazygringo 14y agoSeriously, I hope everyone manages to block everybody's imports. Then lawmakers will be forced to actually overhaul the patent system. Because judging from progress so far, it seems like only a meltdown would do it.
- ktizo 14y agoSome of the lawmakers wouldn't overhaul patent law even if you had a global supply of universal replicators that were powered only by the sound of happy laughter.
- bishnu 14y agoThis would force a settlement. Which would be bad because no actual patent reform would actually be achieved and a few large tech companies would be able to lock-out new entrants into the field.
- rmc 14y agoFriend of mine has a theory that that's what Google is trying to do. Show how absurd the current patent system is and force a meltdown.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- SquareWheel 14y agoI stopped buying Apple products because of this patent nonsense, so I guess that means I can't buy that Nexus 7 I was eyeing either. Why is it that giant companies consistently act so evil?
- WildUtah 14y agoThat's the wrong way to think about it. Now that they're equally evil, you can buy whichever one you want. Or else you can't buy any and you might as well go out and play in the sun. Either way, you win. But if you are planning on buying something, do it now. Soon you might not be able to buy anything.
- mitchty 14y agoYep, if anyone is using legal battles to determine what they should/shouldn't buy, you're going to be drastically disappointed. As an Apple fan, I hope Google gets their way in the courts if not for a while. Why? Well if not only to get the Android people off their high horses in regards to legal issues and the companies behind them, but it would be the perfect way for an actual debate over software patents to be brought the forefront of public debate. Reform on patents will only ever happen if people here feel the pain of the process. As it is we're too far removed still.
- adgar 14y ago> Now that they're equally evil nuance at its finest
- azylman 14y agoWhile I would obviously prefer to see no patent lawsuits, Motorola's lawsuit here is very different from Apple's against Samsung. Apple refuses to license their patents - Samsung et. al. went to Apple and said "won't you please allow us to pay you to use your technology?" to which Apple emphatically answered "NO!". Here, Apple is using Motorola's technology and Motorola said "Apple, will you please pay us if you're going to use our technology?" and Apple's reply was the same: "NO!" Apple is essentially doing the same thing that they're accusing Samsung of, except that Samsung really wanted to pay Apple, whereas Apple emphatically does not want to pay Motorola.
- barista 14y agoIt's the articles like these and the discussion thereof that has dragged down the quality of HN these days.. sad.
- gagan2020 14y agoI think Google is smarter than what looks at the surface. They are indirectly targeting timing of iPhone 5 and Apple's revenue. Good timing Google.
- chestercheetaz 14y agogood luck, Google...
- podperson 14y agoExcept that, according to Florian Mueller: "Even if Motorola won an import ban next week, it would not affect the iPhone 4S and the new iPad 4G, nor the widely-anticipated iPhone 5, which is also expected to incorporate a Qualcomm baseband chipset." http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/google-opts-for-escalation-motorola.html http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/google-opts-for-escalatio...
- ben1040 14y agoPer that article, Mueller is saying that in reference to a previous case before the ITC, not this newest filing.
- vidarh 14y agoMueller is not exactly a reliable source of anything but what the preferred viewpoint of his current corporate clients. Sometimes it coincides with reality, but often it does not (see his coverage of Oracle's case against Google, for instance, and how it kept shifting as he was proven wrong time after time, and consider that Oracle is one of his known clients)
- ajays 14y agoSo are we going to hate on Google now, like we hated on Yahoo suing Facebook?
- S_A_P 14y agoI believe that this may end up being Steve Jobs legacy. He became so focused on destroying android that it consumes everyone. Sure android was an iPhone rip off, google may acted in bad faith by ripping it off. So what? Anyone who makes something enviable should expect the copies to follow them. I am at my saturation point with IP lawsuits. I lack much empathy for any party at this point, consumers are the ones that lose.
- throwa 14y agoWhat makes Android an Iphone rip off. Google bought android in 2005, was the iphone out in 2005? http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2005-08-16/google-buys-android-for-its-mobile-arsenal http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2005-08-16/google-buys-a... Can we try not to revise history.
- veeti 14y ago"Android" in 2005 was a Symbian/BlackBerry-style OS that was being prototyped on a QWERTY device with no touch screen.
- rustynails 14y agoReference please. My understanding is that Android was always intended to be hardware independent, including supporting touchscreen "before iPhone" came out. The claims of a sudden change in direction are revisionist history to suit some people's agendas, http://www.osnews.com/story/25264/Did_Android_Really_Look_Like_BlackBerry_Before_the_iPhone_/ http://www.osnews.com/story/25264/Did_Android_Really_Look_Li... I am grateful for the competition between both groups (Android and IOS). This competition forces organizations to compete on merit, or the market votes with its feet.
- veeti 14y agoYou just gave me my reference. The video in that article was released almost a year after the iPhone. It's pretty obvious that the touch UI in it is also a very early version of the Android we have today. Just one glaring example is how the application menus are navigated by using the hardware keys on the device and not by touch. The touch targets are tiny. The UI is embarrassingly laggy. It probably isn't a coincidence that these BlackBerry-style Android devices never actually got released, either. I have no "agenda". I'm an Android developer and I've owned one Apple device in my lifetime (and have no plans to buy new ones ever because of their business practices). I own multiple Android devices. I just realize that the iPhone truly did change touch devices forever because the UI was something new.
- comatose_kid 14y agoThere are a lot of 'Apple deserves this' type of comments in this thread that I'd like to address. The patent system is probably flawed (IANAL), but companies do need to have a way to defend their innovations. Apple did re-invent the smart phone in 07, and has been the design leader since then. Android has followed in their footsteps - witness the design shift from their pre-iphone roadmap which consisted of blackberry-look-alike designs. Further, there have been no bold re-imaginings of the smartphone in Android-land (sorry, a better notification system doesn't really qualify). They are taking Apple's innovations and applying a different business model to achieve success. Google and Apple are both amazing companies, but I have a hard time finding fault with Apple's decision to sue Google's partners. If the tables were turned, and Google came out with an Android phone first, I would support Google suing Apple for the same reasons.
- cheald 14y agoApple iterated, but they didn't re-invent the smartphone. See the LG Prada, announced in December 2006. It was the first full-screen capacitive touch phone. Its form factor was strikingly similar to the iPhone, and LG even accused Apple of ripping off the design (though they never followed through in court). What Apple did do was market this newer form factor very successfully, effectively tying the iPhone form factor to their brand in view of public opinion, but it's revisionist to claim that they reinvented the smartphone into the design that we know and love today.
- slantyyz 14y ago>> What Apple did do was market this newer form factor very successfully Marketing had a lot to do with it, but so did the quality of the OS. Having gone through several iterations of Windows Mobile devices prior to the first iPhone, the iPhone was the first smartphone that I used that I didn't want to slam on the floor and stomp on repeatedly.
- ori_b 14y agoSure, I'll buy that the iPhone was an improvement. Apple took an idea that was already out in the market, and made it not suck (as much). Is that enough justification for them to sue everyone else in an attempt to lock them out of the market?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- eranation 14y agoAnd I'm still waiting to get my dumb search smart again on Galaxy S3, they fight, we lose.
- neya 14y agoAs far as I can see, this is too bad for consumers AND start-ups. Consumers lose - For example, I lost a very important feature on my phone due to a ridiculous patent threat by Apple (Universal Search). Start-ups lose - I know atleast a couple of friends who were working on an innovative Adreno-Android based project that they left off only because of the fear of being sued (also,they were bootstrapping and they didn't have the money to afford a counter-suit, in case of a legal threat). Now this is exactly the kind of behavior these patent wars are driving us to. Everyone is to blame here, but I personally have a heavy bias against Steve Jobs because he was a man who invented nothing useful except these patent wars. And boy, people keep praising him instead for his innovation...Seriously, we need more articles on how much innovation this man has ruined more he has contributed ever.
- DigitalSea 14y agoSeems like everyone is suing everyone these days. Apple sues Samsung, Samsung counter-sues, Google sue Apple and no doubt Apple will counter-sue and then someone else will counter-sue them all. The patent system is a joke, maybe this will be the final blow that will make someone take notice that the patent system needs some reform.
- LetBinding 14y agoLawyers creating jobs for lawyers. Google's lawyers and Apple's lawyers have a vested interest in keeping each other in business. Extend to all lawyers for tech firms.
- kondro 14y agoMaybe there is actually a conspiracy between the big hardware/software manufacturers to force lawmakers to review patent law.
- cyberswat 14y agoSomeone needs a patent on patents to stop this insanity.
- malkarouri 14y agoThe lawsuits about prior art should be enough to lock down the judicial system on its own.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Jauny 14y agoI find it extremely sad to see companies that we are supposed to respect like Google for example, not accepting any competition anymore. The aim of any company is trying to answer and fix complicated problems to create wealth out of that problem. Fixing a hard problem offer some assurance that others won't be able to fix that problem, hence allowing you some advantage and creating the wealth you expected. But for a few years now, all we hear about is not anymore technology advance or revolution, it's just every company doing the same thing and trying to destroy the others by finding some patent complain they can sue about. Every single time company A sues company B for patents infringement, it's either BS and then the lawsuit goes nowhere and you can be sure company B will instantly fill itself a patent suit against company A; The defense is offence right? Or the lawsuit is legitimate, and instead of just hoping to get back what they seem to deserve, the suing company always seeks the termination of the whole company... that's just sad, because we used to see Google as an example for startups we build, in the culture, the way to manage. But this kind of behavior, which will cost them more than what they'll get in return anyway, is just sad... Do you really think Apple will be stopped from importing its products in the US? What Google/Motorola expect from this? That it passes and Apple slowly dies because of the loss of the US market? I mean seriously... it looks like third grade :(