appeals court
Latest
US appeals court will not rule on repealing net neutrality laws
A US appeals court said it will not reconsider an October ruling that upheld the repeal of net neutrality laws, Reuters reports. Tech and advocacy groups, along with 15 states, had requested that the ruling be reconsidered. The appeals court's decision marks another win for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and allows the repeal of net neutrality laws to stand.
Appeals court sides with ex-NFL players in Madden likeness suit
A federal appeals court struck down Electronic Arts' appeal to dismiss a 2010 lawsuit in which retired NFL players alleged that the publisher used their likenesses without permission in Madden NFL 09. A three-judge panel unanimously declined EA's motion to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds of First Amendment protections under "incidental use." Madden 09 included over 140 historic NFL teams as well as the stats and positions of thousands of retired athletes to celebrate the series' 20th anniversary, and EA allegedly altered jersey numbers and removed the players' names to avoid paying licensing fees, according to the August 2010 lawsuit. The judges referred to another recent likeness lawsuit in the opinion, in which former college athletes sued EA in May 2009 over the use of their likenesses in NCAA Basketball and NCAA Football games. EA proposed a $40 million settlement to that lawsuit in September 2013, resulting in those players earning up to $951 for each year their likeness was featured in the games. The publisher added $8 million in expenses related to that lawsuit in May 2014. EA introduced similar First Amendment-based defenses in its appeal for the retired NFL players lawsuit save for one additional argument: That the likenesses were protected under the First Amendment as incidental use. The judges "held that Electronic Arts's use of the former players' likenesses was not incidental because it was central to Electronic Arts's main commercial purpose: to create a realistic virtual simulation of football games involving current and former National Football League teams." The decision upholds a California court's March 2012 dismissal of EA's attempt to prevent the suit from going to court. Among the plaintiffs listed in the lawsuit is Sam Keller, a former Arizona State, Nebraska and Oakland Raiders quarterback that filed the original likeness lawsuit related to the publisher's college sports games. [Image: EA]
Court rules collecting cellphone location without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment
Quartavious Davis was sentenced to nearly 162 years in prison, without the possibility of parole, for a string of armed robberies in the Miami area several years ago. After having his day before the Court of Appeals for the 11th circuit, much of that severe punishment stands. Davis will likely continue his battle to have his conviction overturned or his sentence reduced, but his case has already struck one victory for privacy advocates. The decision handed down by the judges today marks the first time that cell phone location data has been explicitly included as part of a reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.
HTC drops federal appeal of ITC complaint exonerating Apple, more arrows remain in the quiver
HTC was understandably upset when its first ITC complaint against Apple was tossed out. The company must have since decided that it has bigger fish to fry, as it was just granted a motion to dismiss its federal-level appeal. The choice isn't a defeat so much as an acknowledgment that other disputes are underway which stand a better chance of surviving scrutiny. As it stands, HTC already has more appeals either on deck or in progress that it will more likely want to pursue, such as the dispute over using Google's patents as well as its off-again, on-again acquisition target S3 Graphics' loss at the ITC last year. Apple, naturally, hasn't been waiting around.
Apple files (again) for a preliminary ban against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
If you found yourself longing for the minor tweaks Samsung made to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany earlier this year, you may be in luck: Apple's filed for a preliminary injunction against the slate stateside. It isn't the first one, either, Cupertino filed something similar back in February, though it didn't quite pass legal muster. After gaining some headway earlier this week, Cook's crew is in for round two, according to FOSS Patents, asking for Judge Koh to rule in their favor without a new hearing. Concerned consumers, however, can sidestep the whole mess by simply opting for an injunction-exempt Galaxy Tab 2. Details and speculation can be found at the source link below, just in case you aren't already sick to death of the whole Samsung / Apple spat.
Apple gets another bite, wins appeal to pursue preliminary injunction against Samsung
We'll forgive you if you've forgotten, given the myriad Apple/Samsung legal shenanigans, but back in February, Apple attempted to obtain a preliminary injunction against Samsung to prevent the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a few phones from being sold in the US. Samsung emerged victorious, as the district court denied Cupertino's request because it questioned the validity of a couple of Apple's patents and didn't see how Apple would be irreparably harmed if it failed to get Sammy's products banned. Naturally, Tim Cook's crew appealed that decision, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has decided to give Apple another crack at obtaining an injunction. The CAFC upheld the lower court's ruling as to three of the four patents, but found fault with the District Court's holding that Apple's tablet design patent had substantial questions of validity. Essentially, the lower court held that Apple's patent was likely no good because it was an obvious design in light of two tablets that were created long before Apple patented the iPad's look. However, the CAFC found that one of the previous slate's asymmetrical bezel and lack of an unbroken, all-glass surface (among other differences) were sufficient to render Apple's patent non-obvious. Basically, the appellate court found that the District court "construed the claimed design too broadly," and remanded the issue so that the district court could complete its preliminary injunction analysis. So, Apple's cleared a big hurdle towards getting the Galaxy Tab 10.1 off the US market, but the company's still got to persuade Judge Koh that it'll be irreparably harmed without the injunction. This decision assures even longer legal proceedings, but given how well both of these tech titans are doing these days, we're pretty sure they can afford the attorneys' fees.
Appeals court affirms Richard Garriott's lawsuit win against NCsoft
Ever since Richard Garriott won his lawsuit against former employer NCsoft last year, the legal process has been grinding on ever since to hash out the details. Today we've learned that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed the win of almost $32 million in favor of Garriott. The lawsuit came about after NCsoft fired Garriott in 2008 and then marked his departure as "voluntary," causing his stock options to expire instead of remaining intact through the end of his 2011 contract. In 2010 a court found NCsoft to have breached its contract, and it ordered the company to pay $28 million plus interest and attorney fees to Garriott and his legal team. This recent ruling affirms that outcome and paves the path for Garriott to be compensated. In the ruling, the 5th Circuit Court writes, "It would be unjust to allow NCsoft to sit back during trial, observe Garriott's litigation strategy, and then demand a new trial on damages when it dislikes the verdict." [Source: Androvett Legal Media press release]
French court reverses DS flash cart ruling, Nintendo smiles
Nearly two years ago, a French court dismissed a lawsuit that Nintendo filed against a group of vendors accused of illegally selling DS flash carts. At the time, the game-maker argued that sales of the cartridges should be halted on the grounds that they could be used to illegally pirate software, but the presiding judge thought differently, countering that the R4-like devices could be used to develop homebrews or other DIY projects. Last week, however, the Paris Court of Appeals overturned the ruling, in a decision that Nintendo has met with understandable delight. In a statement released today, the company confirmed that Divineo SARL and five other flash cart retailers must pay a total of €460,000 in criminal fines, along with €4.8 million in damages to Nintendo, as ordered by the appeals court. Details behind the ruling remain vague, though Nintendo hailed it as a "strong message to French companies... that such activities are illegal and will not be tolerated," and that convicted vendors will "risk prison terms, face substantial fines and obligations to pay damages." Sail past the break to read Nintendo's statement, in full.
Anti-Aliased Special Edition: Net neutrality, the FCC, Comcast, and Glenn Beck
var digg_url = 'http://digg.com/tech_news/What_net_neutrality_is_and_why_you_should_support_it'; So today's Wednesday and yes, I know, my column usually doesn't run on Wednesday. However, thanks the recent ruling against the Federal Communications Commission in their net neutrality case, it seems that there's a very relevant topic to talk about as soon as possible. Let me open by saying this -- net neutrality isn't another one of those overblown media stories, or something that we should put off on the backburner. Yet, while everyone's talking about net neutrality, few people are really talking about what it is, why you should care, and why you can't trust everything you're hearing about net neutrality. I've heard more than a few mistruths about the subject recently -- including a whole string of mistruths from everyone's favorite comedy network, Fox News. So today, let's set some things straight and talk about net neutrality. This is very serious stuff for the avid MMO gamer, the casual online gamer, or, well, anyone who touches the Internet.
