Motorola Mobility has gained an injunction against Apple sales in Germany, through careful application of owed royalties on previous infringements, but enforcing it will cost Motorola €100m in bond money. That money has to be lodged with the court in case a later ruling overrides this decision. It's a lot less than the €2bn …
Did Apple and IPCom have to do the same?
Just curious, did Apple or IPCom have to provide a bond for their injunction requests against Samsung and HTC respectively? Or is there a special reason for it in this case?
IF YOU LISTEN CAREFULLY...
YOU WILL hear the sound of how the mighty has fallen.
I don't have any comment about the Apple vs. Motorola case; I just came in here to rant angrily about the mention of Florian Mueller.
In the words of Nelson Muntz
besides a useless comment from someone who's only interest is to see his name on the net more times than Julian Ass(sad)ange.
Else good on Moto, but the fact that the Aussie courts didnt ask for a similar bond from Apple makes you wonder how many judges are fanbois and get free xmas i-Products in the post
Shouldn't the headline be 'Google parks tank painted with Motorola logo on Apple's German lawn'?
- Updated Zucker punched: Google gobbles Facebook-wooed Titan Aerospace
- Elon Musk's LEAKY THRUSTER gas stalls Space Station supply run
- Windows 8.1, which you probably haven't upgraded to yet, ALREADY OBSOLETE
- FOUR DAYS: That's how long it took to crack Galaxy S5 fingerscanner
- Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?