Apple wins 'device destroying' injunction against Motorola

Apple wins 'device destroying' injunction against Motorola

Summary: Apple has won a case against Motorola which -- should the Cupertino-based giant decide to enforce the injunction -- could lead to the destruction of Motorola phones en masse.


Apple, which continues to disrupt the mobile space with its patent litigation, has successfully won a case against rival Motorola, in which a photo management patent was infringed.

The German court ruling said that the "zoomed in" mode for viewing photos on Motorola's Android handsets infringed the Apple-held patent, but not the "zoomed out" mode. EU Patent No. EP2059868 originally derived from another patent, which allowed photos to 'bounce' when they are over-scrolled; because people will attempt to claim anything nowadays.

FOSS Patents author Florian Mueller understands that Apple could order the destruction of devices if it chooses so.

"If Apple enforces the ruling, it can even require Motorola to destroy any infringing products in its possession in Germany and recall, at MMI's expense, any infringing products from German retailers in order to have them destroyed as well."

Having said that, Motorola played down the fears that devices could be subject to such ghastly ends by saying that doesn't expect the ruling to affect future sales, and that it has "implemented a new way to view photos", reports Bloomberg with a spelling mistake.

While Motorola can continue selling the devices, it did not comment on Mueller's comments that would lead to ultimately the mass graves of Motorola phones. Motorola has said that it has already sought a workaround to prevent its smartphones from infringing Apple's patent, thus rendering the court's judgement effectively useless.

It appears from this, that not only is Germany a hot bed of patent activity, litigation --- and frankly, trolling --- but while one company sues another, the defendant in each case is more often than not forced to simply modify the software of the phones.

If you thought the patent wars were all in Apple's favour, you would be wrong. It was just over a week ago when Apple pulled the plug on its iCloud and MobileMe push email feature within the borders of Germany, after Motorola won a patent claim of its own.

Image source: Alex E. Proimos/Flickr.


Topics: Apple, Mobility, Open Source

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • spelling mistakes

    If you are going to publish an article explicitly discussing a spelling mistake by Bloomberg, don't you yourself make a spelling mistake.

    "If you though the patent wars were all in Apple???s favour, you would be wrong. It was just over a week ago..."

    Just saying.
    • Not A Spelling Mistake

      @hoaxoner...I believe Zach is British, and that is the British variation of favor; therefore, it is not spelling mistake.
      • Last time I checked

        Yep, British.
      • Yes, a spelling mistake...

        How about "though" instead of "thought"?
      • Though . . .

        I believe he was pointing out thought, mispelled "though". Most likely a typo.
      • Is it only in America

        Isn't only Americans that spell it "favor" and the rest of the world "favour"? I'm curious who else spells it without the "u".
      • That is the correct spelling of "favour"

        It is the US usage which is a "variation".
    • Oh, okay

      Just FYI, the word "favour" is not spelled wrong. It is a British/Canadian/Australian way of spelling which predates "favor" (the American spelling) by a long shot.
      • Yes, that's what I though

        Quite right, although Zack may have been referring to the "though" instead of "thought".
      • ...


        Ah, I see it now, but that's more of a grammar mistake, not a spelling one. ;-)
    • The mistake is 'though'

      I am quite well versed in the differing ways of spelling favour, colour, theatre, etc. The word 'though' is incorrect. It should be 'thought'. Yikes.
      • the point

        The whole point of the matter was that he criticized a Bloomberg article for having a spelling mistake and then he himself made a spelling mistake.

        That reeks of throwing stones in a glass house.
  • Apple wins ???device destroying??? injunction against Motorola

    What does this mean for Google? Did they just waste all that money on buying Moto Mobile?
    Loverock Davidson-
    • Probably little to nothing

      Mueller predicted that Oracle would destroy Android and that isn't happening at all. Oracle's billion-dollar claims have been reduced to just millions now and Google is still complaining and getting Oracle's patents they acquired from SUN invalidated.
    • Not likely

      Mueller once predicted victory for SCO Unix in their case against IBM.
      • That's some track record he's got ...

        blew the call on SCO.
        seems to have missed it on Oracle v Google.
        now he's stretching on Apple v Everybody.

        Can someone explain why this guy gets quoted so much? Has he ever made a correct call?
    • Yes if you read the headline but

      Its yet another garbage NON story about some trivial function that affects nobody. Yet here I am wasting time responding to it.

      Its utter bollocks and the writer should be thoroughly ashamed of their undehand attempts to create the Apple Superpower. Go Google.... get into them!

      ipad, iphone, asus transformer, blackberry torch... they live fine iin my life thank you very much ! :-)
  • that's bull!

    No device will be destroyed, MMI will tweak the software and then appeal this erroneous decision.
    The Linux Geek
  • Lagging

    Someone should have fully read Moto's response.
    This is a minor function Moto can easily change. They already have a solution IF they elect not to appeal.
  • Florian Mueller-an amazing guy...

    He has no actual record of predicting cases correctly, yet ZDNET and other cite him as THE source on these issues.

    Good job Mueller! Poor journalism ZDNET!