German Court: Motorola Violated Apple’s “Rubber Band” Patent

| News

The Munich I Regional Court in German handed down its verdict on Thursday in Apple's lawsuit alleging Motorola Mobility violated its Over Scroll Bounce, or rubber band effect, patent. The court ruled that Motorola Mobility's Android-based smartphones  and tablets do infringe on the patent, opening the door for a potential injunction blocking sales of the devices in Germany.

German Court rules Motorola infringed on Apple German Court rules Motorola infringed on Apple "rubber band" patent

The rubber band patent protects Apple's control over the effect where a page bounces back a little bit when users can't scroll. Google already has a different effect in its stock Android OS, although it isn't as elegant or responsive as Apple's page bounce.

Apple can impose a preliminary injunction by posting a €25 million bond, which would block sales of Motorola's infringing devices in Germany.

"If Apple posts another €10 million, it can also obligate Motorola to destroy any infringing material, and for yet another €10 million it can get a recall," Florian Mueller of Foss Patents said. "Furthermore, Motorola was held to owe Apple damages for past infringement."

Apple won a patent infringement case against Motorola earlier this year over photo app navigation features, too. In that case, the German court said the page turning feature Motorola used in its smartphone photo gallery app infringed on an Apple patent. The company removed the feature through a software update to avoid a potential injunction.

Motorola Mobility is expected to appeal the Munich I Regional Court's ruling.

The Mac Observer Spin The Mac Observer Spin is how we show you what our authors think about a news story at quick glance. Read More →

Apple clearly has its legal guns aimed at Google, but is shooting through the Internet search giant's Android device partners. Today's loss for Motorola Mobility is yet another blow to Android OS.

Companies such as Samsung, HTC, and Motorola Mobility are taking the hits for using Android in their smartphones and tablets, and Apple will continue to hammer away at them with patent infringement claims. The Android camp may be getting little wins in court, but Apple is in to win the whole war -- and Steve Jobs did say he was willing to go thermonuclear to stop Android.



Maybe they could should rewrite the effect from “Rubber Band” to the “Homer Simpson” effect. wink

Lee Dronick



It would be awesome hearing the occasional Android smartphone going “D’oh” every time they over scrolled the edge. LOL Some folks may even buy them for the effect.

Lee Dronick

Back in the System 7 days I had a collection of Simpsons alert sounds. If you want to get trouble with your wife change her Mac’s keyboard click to D’oh!

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

The blatant copying of other company’s IP and designs needs to stop.

Wow, spambot got me on that link. Let’s try it this way…


Really Bosco?

The colors Apple used are variations of colors it has been using back from earlier Nano’s and Shuffles.

Further, Apple’s colors are metallic, and Nokia’s bright.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

That’s funny Terrin. I don’t recall you pointing to Samsung’s chart of the evolution of their mobile phone lines over two decades as evidence that mitigated the assertion that Samsung SLAVISHLY copied the iPhone.

Frankly, I think this non-sense is more stupid than you think it is. But since Apple has set this silly legal standard of what constitutes “innovation” and what is mere “SLAVISH copying”, shouldn’t it be held to that standard as well?


Bosco I guess I am confused. You didn’t show anything related to Samsung, but instead Nokia. I thought Apple and Nokia settled their differences. Further, you show Nokia’s current selection of colors in comparison to Apple’s current selection, and Apple seems to merely be copying itself. Moreover, the colors amongst the companies seem different. Nokia’s red is different than Apples. The yellows are even more different. Further, if I remember correctly, Nokia sued Apple over standard essential patents. Apple merely countersued over software patents, which is a common defensive move.

Moreover, you must know design patents are not generally about one aspect of a design (e.g. color or shape), but the combination of the design elements.

Samsung defenders like to say Apple claims to have patented the rectangle. Samsung, however,  borrowed too many of Apple’s elements and put them together in the same way (rectangle, color, rounded corners, same selection of colors, placement of buttons, packaging, etc.).

As far as the bounce back patent is concerned. It really is a unique iOS element that wasn’t around before Apple created it and Motorola is blatantly ripping Apple off.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

So you honestly don’t think the new iPod Nano looks eerily similar to the Nokia Lumia? Again, I don’t have a problem with that at all. What I have a problem with is that Apple is the same company that claims to own the rectangle and grid of icons, won a $1B jury verdict on that point, and turns around and appropriates a competitor’s design language a couple weeks later.

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter or Facebook) or Register for a TMO account