A German court has granted Motorola an injunction against Apple, but the ruling apparently does not mean the end of iProducts in the country.
According to Apple, the Manheim ruling does not immediately change anything about its status in Germany. "This is a procedural issue and has nothing to do with the merits of the case. It does not affect our ability to do business or sell products in Germany at this time," the company said in a statement provided to CNET.
Motorola, meanwhile, did not shed much more light on the situation, telling patent blogger Florian Mueller that it "will continue to assert ourselves in the protection of these assets, while also ensuring that our technologies are widely available to end-users. We hope that we are able to resolve this matter, so we can focus on creating great innovations that benefit the industry."
So does the ruling, which affects two patents, ban Apple products? According to The Verge, Apple has two operations in Germany: Apple Inc. and Apple Germany. Motorola sued both companies in this case, but Apple has apparently been focusing on the Apple Germany case and let filings related to Apple Inc. fall through the cracks, resulting in last week's default judgment.
"Since Apple Inc., doesn't actually sell anything in Germany, it's a totally symbolic victory for Motorola — there aren't any products to ban," The Verge's Nilay Patel writes. "Apple confirmed to us that it'll appeal the decision anyway, and that the Apple Germany case continues to move forward."
Mueller, however, wasn't totally convinced. "The 'totally symbolic' claim ignores the fact that Apple certainly has the resources in place to defend itself," he wrote. "The fact that Apple didn't manage to put together a complaint in time, even if 'only' in case concerning the worldwide parent company, must have a reason, and the one thing that surely won't be the reason is that Apple can't afford a proper defense for financial reasons."
FOSS Patents reader Tim Nash, however, suggested to Mueller that Apple's move was related to the European Commission and its recent decision to open an investigation into Samsung and its patent dealings. Apple is also battling Samsung in about two dozen patent cases worldwide.
"Tim thinks that this is about timing. Apple knew that the European Commission was considering an investigation into the use of FRAND patents by Samsung," Mueller wrote. "Tim's theory is that Apple didn't want a court ruling in Mannheim to adversely affect the probability of such an investigation being started. He says that if the court in Mannheim had adjudicated this matter on its merits and had dismissed Apple's FRAND defense, this would have meant that courts in different EU member states rule differently on these FRAND issues. Previously, a Dutch court agreed with Apple and dismissed a Samsung request for an injunction based on a FRAND licensing obligation. In Tim's opinion, Apple didn't want to take any risk of inconsistent rulings."
In September, a Dusseldorf court upheld its previous preliminary injunction in Apple's patent battle against Samsung, banning the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the country.
In October 2010, Motorola sued Apple in three separate complaints over 18 different patents. Several weeks later, Apple sued Motorola, saying that its multi-touch smartphones use Apple-owned intellectual property.
Update: In a separate blog post published last night, Mueller said that "the Friday decision will have business impact in my view, within weeks—if Apple fails to persuade the court to suspend the enforcement of the injunction, but Apple is fairly likely to achieve a temporary suspension until a second, substantive, court decision." Still, he continued, "Cupertino can take a deep breath only after the grant of a temporary suspension, [so] We'll just have to keep an eye on the continuation of the proceedings in Mannheim, where Apple will have to file its objections to the default judgment within two weeks."