Theunis Jansen van Rensburg·
AppleTech news

Apple wins another ludicrous injunction

Apple‘s war on all things Android has by no means quieted down, even after their huge blow against Samsung. This time they have been handed a victory in Germany over Google-owned Motorola Mobility. This again just shows how ridiculous the patent process has become in this industry.
The Munich Regional Court has awarded the company an injunction against Motorola devices that apparently infringe the so-called “œrubber-banding“ patent. This relates to the bounce back animation when scrolling to the top or the bottom of a list. How crazy is that?

If you have ever used an Android (especially Samsung) device, this might sound very familiar. But in most devices it is the bounce back when scrolling left or right to the end of a list, and is mostly used using stock Android‘s “œglowing“ animation. I wonder if Google had that patented.
Luckily for Google, this was a phone built before their acquisition of the struggling American company. Hopefully their subsequent devices will be built with more care.
Source: Engadget

Theunis Jansen van Rensburg
Data scientist, gadget lover, tech junkie, podcaster and co-owner of Bandwidth Blog. Follow Theunis on Twitter: @Theunis_VR
Related

7 Comments

  1. There are
    two sides to every coin. Apple fans punt the angle that the on-going litigation
    war waged by Apple is not to protect its market share, but to encourage the
    innovative spirit of smartphone technology. Others, which in part include me,
    argue that Apple is merely punching below the belt because they are being
    backed into a corner by the Android boxer. In a sense both these views might be
    true but in the end the decision remains in the hands of the customer.
    I wonder
    what Apple would be capable of if the redirected their litigation funds and
    resources towards once again becoming the trailblazer company that brought us
    the first iPhone?

    1. Jaco, I shared your sentiment about Apple wasting time (and PR) with this kind of litigation. I thought a lot of it was quite petty. And then I saw the Samsung documents that came up in court. It struck me that Apple was able to provide four to five years worth of research and development material that had been built up by the hard work of hundreds of individuals, stretching their collective minds, trying to find solutions, throwing out lots of ideas that didn’t work… the kind of thing we all dedicate ourselves to on a daily basis. And then Samsung’s documents were shown in court, basically instructing their designers to make things more like Apple. Whereas Apple had invested millions in developing their user interface (for all its pros and cons), Samsung had just invested in an Apple and told their designers to mimic it and try and improve on it.
      That said, I wonder how much Apple would achieve if they directed all their focus on their product and let the consumer talk for them.

  2. What is wrong with trying to protect your innovations. Apple spent millions of $$ and years on R&D just for someone to copy it over night?? What did a smartphone look like before the iPhone?? How was its OS?? Did apple copy any of them or did they innovate and create something different??? Please Apple should sue them for every penny they made from selling their stolen products

    1. I agree with you a 100% Brad. Apple is the indisputable father of the modern smartphone and has always been the most innovative thinkers. Now that Samsung has jumped onto their successful bandwagon it seems as though Apple has lessened their focus on R&D and upped their litigation defence.
      This puts Apple in a kind
      of catch-22 situation, trying to spread their funds and resources (and most
      importantly focus) between protecting their revolutionary ideas and being the trailblazer of old…

  4. Mr van rensburg. I have followed your site for a while now and have read several of your ‘news stories’ or editorials or whatever you call this. And I have a couple of questions: how can you write about apple when you hate it so much? Do you not feel it compromises your journalistic integrity? And secondly do you have a clue about patent law and what all this means to companies involved in defending their intellectual property?

Comments are closed.