AppleLegal
Latest
Daily Update for June 13, 2013
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Apple says it has 20% of the e-book market
With Apple's legal battle with the DOJ now in its second week, more details surrounding Apple's success in the e-book market have emerged. While the e-book market still, by and large, belongs to Amazon, it appears that Apple has been doing much better than most would have initially imagined. Though most estimates pegged Apple's share of the e-book market in the 10 percent range, Apple executive Keith Moerer testified in court on Wednesday that Apple's share of the e-book market is around 20 percent these days. paidContent on Wednesday relayed some of Moerer's testimony: "The government called the iBookstore 'a failure,' and charged that 'Apple pricing was unfair to consumers,' and that 'Apple sold fewer books because of the higher price caps.' Moerer challenged that characterization, 'I disagree. E-book sales grew 100 percent last year at the iBookstore and it had over 100 million customers.' The government countered that 'when you drop prices you sell more books,' and Moerer said, 'sometimes, yes.'" Moerer added that Apple's share of the e-book market now stands at about 20 percent. Apple, if you recall, is being taken to task by the government for allegedly colluding with publishers to artificially increase the price of e-books across the board by reverting to the agency model of e-book pricing wherein publishers, and not retailers, determine the pricepoint of books. While on the stand, Moerer echoed what Apple and publishers have been arguing all along -- that there was no grand plan of collusion to raise prices, noting that Apple even fought against some publisher efforts to raise the price of e-books beyond US$14.99. Publishers Weekly has an in-depth look at today's legal proceedings that's worth reading if you wanna stay abreast of the latest happenings in the case.
Lawyer at Apple law firm started planning patent attack just after iPhone introduction
Ars Technica has a fascinating story about a lawyer for one of Apple's hired law firms and his close relationship with a patent company that sued the Cupertino company for infringement. This tale of legal intrigue revolves around lawyer John McAleese who worked for Morgan, Lewis & Bockius. At the same time his law firm was working with Apple, he was helping his wife, Jennifer McAleese, launch a patent company, FlatWorld Interactives, that targeted Apple and its iPhone. This conflict of interest dates back to 2007, when the original iPhone was released. FlatWorld Interactives courted known patent trolls and Apple competitors, suggesting their touchscreen patent could help these companies sue Apple. To Google, Jennifer McAleese wrote: The patent link below may be of interest to Google regarding Apple's swiping mechanism. Our inventor, Slavko Milekic was granted this patent in 2005. In 2007, we placed the patent in reissue to tailor it more closely to iPhone claims. We have been told by many law firms that the patent is extremely valuable even without the reissue possibilities... If you are interested in discussing the patent please let us know. I think it could be an important asset for your ongoing 'talks' with Apple. Flatworld Interactives sued Apple in 2012, but John McAleese's role as both a lawyer for an Apple law firm and an adviser to a patent troll was not known until this year. Not surprisingly, Apple is using this potential conflict of interest in its case against Flatworld Interactives. You can read more about McAleese and his wife's patent troll startup in the Ars Technica article.
Apple/DOJ e-book price-fixing trial begins today
The Apple e-book price-fixing trial is set to begin today in New York, according to Reuters. The trial begins 14 months after the US Department of Justice accused Apple and five other book publishers of fixing the cost of e-books. In April 2012 the DOJ accused Apple, Penguin, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, the Hachette Book Group and MacMillan of conspiring to fix the prices of e-books in order to break the stranglehold Amazon had on the market. Though the five book publishers decided to settle out of court, Apple has refused to do so. When asked about a settlement, CEO Tim Cook has said Apple was "...not going to sign something that says we did something we didn't do." The Department of Justice is not seeking financial damages from Apple if the government wins the case. Instead they are looking for a legal ruling that will block Apple from making similar arrangements with third-party companies in the future.
Apple to pay $53 million in iPhone water damage settlement
Bloomberg is reporting that Apple will pay US$53 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleges the company unfairly denied warranty coverage to iPhone and iPod owners because of faulty water damage indicator tapes in the devices. Like many companies, Apple uses water damage indicator tape inside its devices so it can tell if the device has been submerged in water. The tape, made by 3M, changes color when it comes into contact with liquid. However, the plaintiffs in the case successfully argued that the tape Apple used could change color while exposed to humidity or moisture in the air. Though Apple has denied any wrongdoing and the court has yet to approve the settlement offer, users of affected units can expect up to a US$300 compensation per device. It's unknown if that compensation will come in the form of a check or a credit for a new device. Affected units are any iPod touches with warranties that were denied due to water coverage before June 2010, and any iPhones with denied warranties due to water damage before Dec. 31, 2009.
Daily Update for May 14, 2013
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Apple could face 'legal undertakings' in UK over in-app purchases
Remember the UK police officer who reported his son to authorities for fraud after the 13-year-old ran up a US$5,600 bill for in-app purchases on the iOS App Store? That kind of unexpected consumer cost has thrown the UK Office of Fair Trading (OFT) into a tizzy, and they've announced that they'll be starting a six-month investigation into whether children are being "unfairly pressured or encouraged to pay for additional content in 'free' web- and app-based games." Our sister site TechCrunch confirmed that the OFT is contacting Apple and Google; not surprising, as the companies run the two largest app stores, but it's not clear whether either company could be held responsible for the actions of individual developers who abuse IAPs. While Google Play includes guidelines for developers and reserves the right to remove apps that abuse them, it does not review / approve individual apps for compliance in advance; Apple's App Store, of course, does approve or reject apps prior to release. When the investigation is completed, the OFT could seek "legal undertakings from court" if it is displeased with the results. An OFT spokesperson told TechCrunch that companies ignoring court directions could face "an unlimited fine." The OFT Senior Director for Goods and Consumer, the implausibly-named Cavendish Elithorn, noted in a statement that "The OFT is not seeking to ban in-game purchases, but the games industry must ensure it is complying with the relevant regulations so that children are protected. We are speaking to the industry and will take enforcement action if necessary." Neither Google nor Apple have replied to TechCrunch with regard to the investigation.
Judge: Apple, Samsung using courts as business strategy
Miami US District Judge Robert Scola is not very happy with Apple or Samsung. He recently accused both sides of having "no interest in efficiently and expeditiously resolving this dispute" and of using the legal proceedings "as a business strategy." Bloomberg notes that the litigants have been battling in Florida since 2010 and currently account for more than 180 claims. Judge Scola denied a request from both Apple and Samsung to reduce the scope of the case, saying, "without a hint of irony, the parties now ask the court to mop up a mess that they made." Instead of a mop job, the judge gave both parties four months to get their ducks in a row, as it were.
US Patent Office withdraws primary objections to 'iPad mini' trademark application
As noted by MacRumors, The US Patent Office has withdrawn primary objections to Apple's "iPad Mini" trademark application. The primary objections were raised last month when the USPTO deemed elements related to the "iPad mini" name as descriptive instead of contributing a unique name to a product. But now a published office action letter from the USPTO confirms the objection has been withdrawn. It appears Apple will be granted a trademark on the "iPad mini" name as long as no other entities are found to have the name trademarks and provided Apple only seeks to protect the term "mini" when it is used with "iPad" before it and not as a trademarked term in its own right.
Chinese animation studio sues Apple
Shanghai Animation Film Studio (SAFS) has sued Apple for what it claims are apps containing unlicensed versions of its work in the App Store (Google translation). The group is after 3.3 million yuan (about US$530,000 as of this writing) in compensation. SAFS claims that 110 examples of its work appear unlicensed in the App Store. A Chinese court has allegedly accepted the case, but no dates have been set. [Via M.I.C. Gadget]
Samsung hopes new jury will nullify Apple patent infringement award
FOSS Patents is reporting that Samsung is asking the court to appoint a new jury to determine whether or not 14 of its products infringed on Apple's patents. The move, if granted by the court, could result in a lower monetary award to Apple than the US$1.05 billion initially awarded last August. That initial award has already been chipped away at by the court, with Judge Lucy Koh pulling $450 million of the verdict as the jury had improperly awarded damages for 14 products. In this latest move in the never-ending Samsung/Apple chess game, the Korean manufacturer has asked for permission to exceed the court's limit on the number of pages submitted for its response to Apple's request for a case management conference on April 3. Samsung invoked the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution when explaining the need for the extra documentation, as it "would require that the new jury retry certain liability issues along with the damages issues that are subject to the Court's new trial order." Samsung's request went on to say that "the question of damages on the counterclaim is so interwoven with that of liability that the former cannot be submitted to the jury independently of the latter without confusion and uncertainty, which would amount to a denial of a fair trial."
Australia's 'Apple Tax' quantified by MacStories blogger
Tomorrow, Apple, Microsoft and Adobe face the Federal Australian Parliament inquiry into pricing of IT products. The companies are being asked about why prices for hardware and software Down Under appear to have a noticeable markup compared to those elsewhere in the world. All three companies were asked to voluntarily appear before the inquiry; when they failed to do so, the committee sent a summons to each company forcing them to appear. MacStories' Graham Spencer has prepared a detailed study of exactly how much of a "tax" Aussie Apple fans are paying compared to American customers. Spencer collected prices from Apple's US and Australian websites, removed the 10 percent GST (goods and services tax), converted the Australian price to US dollars and then calculated the percent markup of the Australian prices based on the original prices in the States. His findings showed that Macs and iPads have a relatively low markup, with that for the Retina display iPad only around 2 to 3 percent. Likewise, iPod prices generally have a low markup of between 3 and 7 percent depending on the model. iPhones, however, had a "more considerable" markup close to 20 percent with some models, although the iPhone 4 is actually less expensive in Australia. The largest markups appeared for products in the iTunes Stores, with music marked up about 61 percent over US prices, movies about 33.5 percent and TV shows almost 26 percent. Only apps were "reasonably" marked up by about 10 percent over their US counterparts. Should readers wish to perform their own analyses of the data, Spencer has made it available for download on the MacStories site.
Daily Update for March 20, 2013
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Judge Paul S. Grewal has strong words for Apple's legal team
When you're in the midst of a series of court battles around the world, it seems like the last thing that you want to be doing is angering judges. Unfortunately for Apple, that's just what they seem to have done, as US Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal (at right) invited plaintiff's lawyers in a privacy lawsuit to pursue sanctions against the company due to "unacceptable" conduct. The story appeared last night via Bloomberg. Grewal was irritated that the court has had to essentially police Apple's attempt at producing documentation for the case, including emails and documents from employees. Grewal berated Apple lawyer Ashlie Beringer, saying it "doesn't sound like you did a lick of work" in determining which documents shouldn't be turned over to the plaintiff's team. For her part, Beringer took full responsibility for the failure, saying that she "was not asking the right questions" to select the documentary evidence and that, "Absolutely that was a failure of management on my part, one that won't happen again." Apple apparently did complete the document production late on Monday night after making "Herculean efforts over the last two weeks," according to Beringer. The case in question is one that Apple had a good chance of having thrown out as a class-action suit, regarding allegations that the company was capturing geographical location information without user consent. [via The Verge]
EU Justice Commissioner: AppleCare violates member states' laws
EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding blasted Apple in a speech in Brussels today and urged EU member states to ensure that Apple complies with consumer protection laws, which require consumer electronics devices to come with a mandatory two-year warranty. "This case and the responses I received since I sent my letter have highlighted rather clearly just why the Commission cannot sit on the side-lines on enforcement issues," Reding said. "The approaches to enforcement in these types of cases turn out to be very diversified and inconsistent at a national level. In at least 21 EU Member States Apple is not informing consumers correctly about the legal warranty rights they have. This is simply not good enough." The EU has some of the strongest consumer protection laws on the planet. All products are required to carry a two-year warranty. Apple is under fire for allegedly failing to tell consumers about the guaranteed two-year coverage while selling its own three-year AppleCare warranty -- two years of which they already get with their purchase. As Dow Jones Newswires reports, Apple pulled AppleCare sales from Italy last November and currently the computer maker is being sued by consumer groups in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and Portugal over its warranty proceedings.
Apple loses 'Ifone' appeal case in Mexico
Apple has lost its appeal case in Mexico over the naming rights to the iPhone in the country, according to the Wall Street Journal. As we reported in November, in 2009 Apple asked Ifone, a Mexican telecommunications company which registered its name in 2003, to change its name to avoid confusion. The company refused and Apple sued it, saying Ifone had lost its naming rights due to letting the brand lapse. Apple lost its request in court and was subsequently counter-sued by Ifone for damages. Ifone then also sought to cease sales of any iPhone-branded Apple product, which prompted Apple to file its injunction. According to the Wall Street Journal, "The [Mexican] Supreme Court this week rejected Apple's appeal against the decision at the request of Ifone. Ifone's corporate lawyer Eduardo Gallastegui said the decision frees the company to continue with its claims, already submitted to the Industrial Property Institute IMPI, for damages resulting from the use of its name by Apple and by three Mexican mobile phone service providers: America Movil unit Telcel, Spain's Telefonica SA and Grupo Iusacell." There is no word yet on how this will affect Apple's ability to sell its iPhone in Mexico. However it's possible that the two companies will come to a financial agreement that benefits them both.
Tim Cook ordered to testify in e-book case
According to Reuters, Apple CEO Tim Cook will have to sit for a deposition in the US government's case against Apple regarding e-book price fixing. US District Judge Denise Cote decided in favor of the Justice Department's request to have Cook on the stand. He will be made available for four hours on the day he's in the courtroom. In its request, the Justice Department argued that Cook likely had conversations with then-CEO Steve Jobs about e-books. Apple was opposed to having Cook take the stand, saying that his testimony would be "cumulative and duplicative," but Judge Cote apparently did not agree.
Apple asks for App Store monopoly lawsuit to be dropped
Apple has asked a federal judge in California for the lawsuit alleging it holds an App Store monopoly be dismissed, according to Bloomberg. The lawsuit was brought forth by several attorneys in 2011 who argued that the company holds a monopoly on app downloads because there is nowhere else a user can legally go to buy an iPhone app if they don't like the price of the app on the App Store. Apple attorney Dan Wall argued that the lawsuit should be dropped because the App Store is a distribution point for apps -- with developers setting the price and Apple taking a 30 percent cut -- and operating as a distribution center doesn't violate any anti-trust laws. "There's nothing illegal about creating a system that is closed in a sense," Wall said. US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers has not revealed when she will make a decision on the case.
Apple abandons Newton trademark
Even though Steve Jobs killed the Newton when he returned to Apple in 1997, the company has maintained the trademark for Apple's first PDA ever since. Well, until earlier this month that is. As noted by PatentlyApple, Apple officially abandoned the Newton trademark on February 12, 2013. The discovery was made when PatentlyApple was searching through trademarks in the Canadian IP office this month. With the abandoning of the Newton trademark, it's likely we will never see another product from Apple called "Newton" again.
Daily Update for February 13, 2013
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
