Washington Federal Judge Denies Germany's Right to Ban Windows
April 12, 2012 4:08 PM
comment(s) - last by
Even if Germans side with Motorola enforcement using FRAND patent is illegal opines judge
Faced with licensing demands from Microsoft Corp. (
) ($10-$15 per handset) and the
threat of a ban
from rival gadgetmaker Apple, Inc. (
), Motorola Mobility has been pushing forward with its
of using its standards-heavy patent portfolio
. That approach currently has it
under antitrust investigation
in the European Union, but has not dissuaded Motorola from pursuing enforcement.
Motorola, a top Android phonemaker, continues to operate independently -- for now -- after Chinese regulators
held up the approval
of the company's
acqusition by Google
). China appears to be using the delay as a means of bargaining with the search engine provider who has
opposed its censorship demands
. That means that for now Motorola Mobility is forging its own way in court.
I. Judge Appears Skeptical of Motorola's FRAND Enforcement
controversial lawsuits against Microsoft
, which span several international courts, hit an unusual snag when the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
ruled in a special hearing that Motorola could not enforce a FRAND-based ban on Microsoft in Germany.
Microsoft has complained that Motorola is asking for thousands of times the typical "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" (FRAND) rate (which typically is around 2 cents per device). The patent in question is a Motorola patent on h.264 -- a commonly used video encoding standard.
A Washington federal court has forbidden Motorola from banning Windows sales in Germany until a U.S. case advances.
[Image Source: All About Samsung]
The restraining order, put in place by presiding judge
Judge James Robart
, may be enforceable as Motorola Mobility is a U.S.-based firm. However, it is unusual in that it is a case where a U.S. federal court is moving to essentially strip a top trade partner of its judicial authority in the short term.
In addition to the pending German case, Motorola and Microsoft are duking it out in a corresponding U.S. case that is currently being heard by Judge Robart. Until a May 7 hearing in the U.S. case, Judge Robart says that any attempts to enforce a ban on Windows sales in Germany (via preliminary injunction) would be illegal. He's forcing Motorola to post a $100M USD bond in the interest of compliance.
While the U.S. case has not been ruled on, the decision indicates the presiding Judge is skeptical of the validity of Motorola's FRAND based litigation.
II. What the Ban Might Have Meant to Motorola
Some believed Motorola might pull off a product ban in the Germany ruling, which was set to land on April 17. Germany's legal system works a bit differently in that patent validity is run in a separate track, meaning that in most cases -- even where there's a strong possibility that a patent is bad or being unfairly enforced -- the German court still enforces a ban on the alleged infringed product for the duration of the trial. Apple has achieved
similar bans of Motorola
Comp., Ltd. (
) Android devices in Germany.
Microsoft said the temporary ban on the injunction was necessary, writing in its motion for a restraining order, "If Motorola's sharp tactics are allowed to unfold, Microsoft will be denied a meaningful remedy in this action. Microsoft seeks a preliminary injunction here to preserve the status quo, to preserve this Court's ability to grant Microsoft meaningful relief, and to prevent irreparable harm to Microsoft and the public in the meantime."
Motorola and Microsoft are fighting over 100 patents, but the German case focused on only two, involving the h.264 codec. [Image Source: Joker Blog]
Jess Jenner, a lawyer with Ropes and Gray -- the firm representing Motorola in the U.S. case -- argued that a ban would be acceptable given that Motorola could repay Microsoft if the U.S. court later ruled it to be unfair. And she said the restraining order would be the equivalent of meddling in foreign justice, stating, "You are being asked to interfere with a German court. It's an intolerable intrusion on another country's prerogative."
Judge Robart didn't buy that line of logic.
Microsoft claims that the German lawsuit -- which only involves 2 patents out of the 100 being disputed in the U.S. -- is a mere maneuver to gain leverage by Motorola, exploiting Germany's controversial ban-friendly IP enforcement. As even a temporary ban on Windows sales in the large EU nation would be a financial blow to Microsoft, Motorola could use a ban to try to force a more favorable settlement in the U.S.
A jury trial is scheduled for November in the U.S., if the companies cannot settle their differences before then.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Judicial Review for Jurisdiction
4/12/2012 4:59:00 PM
Given that both companies are U.S. base I could see how a U.S. judge might intervene; but in theory neither party has broken a U.S. law or contract. So how does a U.S. judge consider that they have a right to rule on an issue outside their jurisdiction? Also this judge is based in a location that Microsoft has overwhelming influence; which has all of the markings of bias.
RE: Judicial Review for Jurisdiction
4/12/2012 5:14:42 PM
What evidence do you have of Microsoft's "overwhelming" influence over the court system?
...Anyhow, that's the most blatantly misleading article headline I've seen since, well, forever perhaps. I'm almost surprised Jason (who else, of course!) couldn't contrive the headline to somehow blame it all on Apple.
RE: Judicial Review for Jurisdiction
4/12/2012 6:10:14 PM
If you read the sentence "Also this judge is based in a location that Microsoft has overwhelming influence; which has all of the markings of bias.".
The sentence "What evidence do you have of Microsoft's "overwhelming" influence over the court system?" is incorrect. Microsoft has influence in the location (read population base and as a major employer and business interest).
RE: Judicial Review for Jurisdiction
4/13/2012 7:44:05 AM
A distinction without a difference.
Your first sentence talked of 'bias' with reference to a judge. A judge is part of the court system, therefore you implied that Microsoft have influence over the court system.
"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch
EU Kicks Motorola While It's Down, Opens Official Antitrust Proceedings
April 3, 2012, 9:10 AM
Judge's Ruling Upholds Apple Patent, Could Jeopardize Android's Future in the U.S.
April 2, 2012, 9:32 PM
German Court Overturns Android Victory Due to FRAND Concerns
February 27, 2012, 7:24 PM
Motorola Demanded $22.50 Per Windows Laptop, Microsoft Complains to EU
February 23, 2012, 4:30 PM
German Judge Bans Androids for Swipe-Unlocking, Despite Prior Art
February 16, 2012, 7:11 PM
Quick Note: Whoops, Microsoft Pushed Unwanted Windows 10 to Some Users
October 15, 2015, 9:04 PM
Quick Note: Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 10565 Fixes Boot Camp 6.0 Issues
October 13, 2015, 11:39 AM
Microsoft's HD-500 ("Display Dock"), the Magic Sauce Behind Continuum
October 6, 2015, 5:30 PM
Quick Note: Windows 10 Hits 110 Million Devices, VMs
October 6, 2015, 4:30 PM
Windows 10 on Raspberry Pi, IoT Devices Sees Developer Debut
August 12, 2015, 2:41 PM
Sony Issues Bizzare "Do Not Update" Edict to VAIO PC Owners
August 11, 2015, 9:42 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information