CourtOrder
Latest
Germany outlaws Amazon's one-click Dash buttons
Amazon has run afoul of consumer protection laws in Germany over its click-to-buy Dash buttons for Prime members. A Munich regional court ordered the company to stop taking orders from the dinky devices because they fail to provide customers with up-to-date pricing information. The ruling comes in the wake of a case brought against Amazon by Germany's consumer protection watchdog, which claimed it was acting after receiving complaints by Amazon customers. Amazon plans to appeal the ruling, according to local media.
FBI chief 'not trying to set precedent' with shooter's iPhone
FBI Director James Comey has penned an editorial about its dispute with Apple over unlocking the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook. In it, he tried to quell criticism by Apple's Tim Cook that a court's decision forcing Apple to help the FBI access the device could have "chilling" implications. "The San Bernardino litigation isn't about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message," says Comey. "We don't want to break anyone's encryption or set a master key loose on the land. It is about the victims and justice. We owe them a thorough and professional investigation."
BlackBerry wins sales injunction against Typo's familiar-looking keyboard case
It's been a tough week for Ryan Seacrest: first, American Idol ratings hit an all-time low, and now, a judge has ruled against his iPhone accessory company in court. BlackBerry has won a court order that bars Typo from selling its very familiar physical keyboards after convincing a judge that the products might've infringed on its patents. As Bloomberg reports, the presiding judge said that the Canadian smartphone manufacturer is "likely to prevail" on the infringement claims, and that Typo hasn't done much to prove that BlackBerry's patents were invalid. The judge continued to show no quarter by out-and-out dismissing Typo's worries that a temporary sales ban could put the company under. If you were on the fence before, maybe this will be the push to grab a Typo while you still can.
UK judge who upheld order for Apple to apologize now works for Samsung
You may remember a case last year in which the a UK judge overseeing the Samsung vs. Apple case forced the company to post a public apology on its website stating that Samsung did not infringe on Apple's iPad design. FOSS Patents is reporting today that one of the judges who upheld that bizarre order, Sir Robin Jacob, is now in the employ of none other than Samsung. Apple, to its credit, used a little snark in its court-ordered apology last year and noted that, "while the UK court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad." Apple was forced by the court to change that statement and complied, but placed the revision in a location on its UK home page that required users to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page to read it. After Apple's first attempt to comply with the strange order, Sir Robin noted a "lack of integrity" by the company in their dealings with the court. FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller hits the nail on the head in reporting this situation, stating that, "For someone so concerned with 'integrity' it is utterly unusual to issue a high-profile and extreme ruling in favor of a particular party (Samsung in this case) only to be hired as an expert by that same party in another dispute."
Apple told to rewrite 'Samsung did not copy' statement, post it on front page until Dec 14th
Apple might not have liked having to publish a notice stating that Samsung did not copy its design, as the result of a court ruling, but it complied all the same. Or did they? A UK court of appeal has criticized the firm over its choice of wording, considering it slippery enough to warrant a rewrite. The Guardian reports that the acknowledgement posted by Apple was deemed non-compliant with the court's order. Apple has today been told to correct its statement, and re-post it on the front page of its website, with at least an 11-point font (and not as a hidden footer link) within 48 hours. The Cupertino team rebuffed, claiming that it would take at least two weeks to get a fresh rework together, a statement that reportedly caused disbelief from some court officials. So, the clock is ticking, and somewhere a legal team is no doubt engaging in some serious thinking. The new statement must remain on Apple's site until December 14th, plenty of time to catch the attention of eager Christmas shoppers.
Apple and Samsung CEOs set to sit down, attempt to settle disputes
With countless suits filed across the globe, the CEOs of Apple and Samsung surely have a lot to talk about. Thankfully, they'll be getting the chance to do exactly that (with lawyers in tow, naturally) at some point over the next 90 days, according to FOSS Patents. Both sides are apparently "willing to participate" in a sit down overseen by a magistrate judge. Clearly a ruling of hugging it out is needed in this case. Update: Here's Samsung's official reply on the matter: "At the direction of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Samsung and Apple have agreed to participate in a Magistrate Judge Settlement Conference. This settlement conference will take place within 90 days, with the presence of each party's chief executive officer and general counsel."
Judge denies Apple's request to speed up its suit against Samsung
Apple's lawyers in its lawsuit against Samsung are an impatient bunch. First, they asked the court for an accelerated discovery process so they could get their hands on Sammy's forthcoming products ASAP. Then they filed a motion to trim the time until trial and asked for an order shortening the time to file the briefs for that motion. Yesterday, the court told Apple to slow its roll by denying its request to compress the briefing schedule. In doing so, the judge cited Apple's knowledge of Samsung's alleged infringement for more than a year and the fact it engaged in license negotiations with the Korean company during that time -- which the court thinks undermines Jobs and Co.'s argument that they'll suffer substantial harm without a hurried hearing schedule. It's a minor ruling in the grand scheme of things, but it indicates that Apple's cries to condense the time until trial may fall upon deaf judicial ears. Looks like the folks in Cupertino may have to look to the ITC if they want the rocket docket treatment.
