fosspatents
Latest
USPTO confirms 'Steve Jobs patent'
Last December, the US Patent and Trademark Office gave Apple a tentative rejection on 20 claims by Apple regarding the "Steve Jobs patent" after it was anonymously challenged by one of Apple's rivals. The patent covers a "touch screen device, method and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics." However, that December 2012 decision was not the end of the story. Foss Patents has picked up on a decision granted last month by the USPTO that upholds the 20 claims covered by US Patent No. 7,479,949. The September 4, 2013, report reaffirms Apple's patents on a wide range of multitouch technology found in devices like the popular iPhone and iPad. You can read the complete report over at Foss Patents. Enjoy.
ITC postpones its decision on Apple's complaint against Samsung
Yesterday, August 1, 2013 was the day that the US International Trade Commission (ITC) was supposed to make a decision on Apple's complaint against Samsung. According to Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents, the ITC gave notice yesterday that it is postponing that decision by eight days until August 9, 2013. Not to be confused with the possible ban on importation of older Apple iPhones and iPads due to infringement by Apple of some Samsung technical patents, this ruling was to determine possible sanctions against Samsung after Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender found in October 2012 that Samsung had infringed on three Apple technical patents and one design patent. Additional violations by Android's text-selection feature were found after the ITC had remanded some issues to Judge Pender. August 9 is going to be an important day for Apple. Not only will the ITC announce its decision (unless it is postponed again), but that's the day that the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit holds a hearing on Apple's appeal of a court denial of an injunction against a number of Samsung products found to be infringing on Apple patents. The next three days are also critical for Apple, as the presidential review period for the Samsung ban against older iPhones and iPads expires. As noted yesterday, a bipartisan group of US senators has called on US Trade Representative Michael Froman to veto the ban, and today Washington, DC-based antitrust lawyer Jay Jurata called for the White House to "rein in the ITC" on standard-essential patents.
Apple grabs another win against Samsung in London court
Watching the patent lawsuits between Apple and Samsung is like watching a tennis match -- first the ball is on Apple's side and they lob it over the net right past Samsung, then Samsung sneaks a shot past Apple and they win a game. The latest news, this time out of a court in London, is that Apple has won a case over the use of Standard Essential Patents in its products. Samsung had asserted that Apple products infringed on a Standard Essential Patent held by the South Korean manufacturer. The Wednesday ruling means that Samsung, which was hoping for 2.4 percent royalties on sales of any of Apple's 3G-capable devices, won't get a thing. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents told ZDNet that "On a worldwide basis Apple has now fended off 24 assertions of Standard-Essential Patents by Samsung. Samsung prevailed only on three such patents, two of them in Korea. With every win Apple scores, Samsung's demand for a 2.4 percent royalty on Apple's sales of 3G-capable products looks more ridiculous."
Apple adds 6 Samsung products to second US patent lawsuit
Late last week, Apple filed a motion to expand its California infringement lawsuit against Samsung to include the handset maker's latest mobile devices. According to FOSS Patents, Apple added the Galaxy Note II, the Galaxy S III, the Galaxy Tab 8.9 WiFi, the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, the Rugby Pro and the Galaxy S III Mini to its claim. Samsung, last week, also expanded its infringement claims in the same case to include the iPad 4 and the iPad mini. This is the second Apple v. Samsung lawsuit making its way through the California court system and was filed in early 2012. The first lawsuit ended with a guilty verdict against Samsung.
Apple seeking $2.5 billion from Samsung
Apple filed a brief in its infringement case against Samsung and argued the Korean company should pay Apple a combined total of $2.525 billion, according to FOSS Patents. The amount includes $25 million in royalty damages and another $2.5 billion, which includes the amount Samsung has unjustly gained and Apple has lost because of Samsung's copycat devices. Breaking it down, Apple asked for $2.02 per unit for the "overscroll bounce" '318 patent, $3.10 for the '915 "scrolling API" patent, $2.20 for the "tap to zoom and navigate" '163 patent and $24 for the trade dress and design patents. Apple was less generous in the payment amounts when it addressed Samsung's claim that Apple infringed its wireless standard essentials patents. If Samsung prevails in its patent infringement case, Apple offered to pay the Korean manufacturer a half-cent for each infringed standards essential patent. This disparity is due in part to the standards-essential nature of Samsung's patents, which must be licensed under fair and reasonable non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms.
Apple files third complaint against HTC
Apple filed a third complaint against HTC with the International Trade Commission, according to a report by Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents. The latest complaint is based on a December 2011 ruling that says HTC infringed on two Apple patents. These "data tapping" patents let users tap on a number or URL on their phone and open up a menu with actions like "Call" and "Open in Browser." These violations focus on the method of implementing this feature, not the feature itself. HTC said it updated its products with a work-around that is no longer infringing, but this new complaint disputes that claim. In its filing, Apple argues that HTC's latest handsets still violate these "data tapping" patents. It lists 29 phones including the flagship HTC One X, Sprint's HTC EVO 4G LTE and the upcoming HTC Droid Incredible 4G LTE for Verizon. The ITC will now look closely at HTC's current crop of Android phones and could order an injunction that would ban the import of these phones. Last month, select HTC phones were held at the border by US Customs per an earlier ITC injunction. The handsets were later released after HTC assured the government agency that these products were not infringing.
Samsung accuses Apple of withholding evidence
Earlier this week, CEOs from Apple and Samsung met for court-ordered mediation talks that turned out to be fruitless. Now, the two companies are back to their legal hijinks with Samsung claiming Apple is withholding evidence, according to a report in FOSS Patents. Samsung is asking the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to penalize Apple for not complying with an April 12, 2012 order that required Apple to provide Samsung with documents from related proceedings. Apple tried to comply, but some of the documents were from ITC investigations and the ITC wouldn't let Apple share them with Samsung. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents believes Samsung is using this document request to delay the trial. It will take time for the district court and the ITC decide which documents can and cannot be shared with the Korean company. Apple is asking for clarification from the court on this point and is waiting for a response.
Why Apple's many patents in Germany get stayed
Here at TUAW, we've found ourselves covering lawsuits around Apple quite a bit lately, especially in Germany, where Apple is getting sued by lots of companies, and then getting shut down by the courts. Ever wonder why so many companies sue in Germany, or why so many of Apple's arguments are stayed? Here comes FOSS Patents to the rescue, with this great piece on Apple's legal troubles. The long and short of it is that in Germany, patents are challenged along two paths: Invalidity, and infringement. That is, first, a patent is examined for whether it's valid or not, and then second, it's examined against the product in question for actual infringement. Validity is determined much more quickly than infringement, and in Germany and the European patent system, the two paths are much more separate than anywhere else. And why are Apple's patents being stayed so much? FOSS suggests that Apple expects this -- it's using a shotgun style for its patent fights, hoping that one of them eventually gets through and puts them at a point where they can really exploit that winning patent for all it's worth. Apple certainly has the cash and resources to play a lot of cards, and that's exactly what it's doing. Sooner or later, one of Apple's patents will stand, and then it will use that powerful patent to block competitors whenever possible.
Judge Richard A. Posner scolds Apple's lawyers
Well-known Circuit Court Judge Richard A. Posner told Apple's lawyers that he is tired of the company's courtroom antics in its patent dispute with Motorola. According to a report in FOSS Patents, Posner writes in a recent order, "I've had my fill of frivolous filings by Apple. The next such motion, and I shall forbid it to file any motions without first moving for leave to file." FOSS Patents provides some insight into the back and forth that led to this harsh rebuke of Apple. In a nutshell, Apple is trying to block Motorola from deposing a particular expert by bringing up the same motion again, after it was denied the first time. Supposedly, the company is also pushing the issue so quickly that Motorola isn't able to adequately respond. Posner is overseeing the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Samsung claims Apple is infringing on eight patents in California documents
Executives from Samsung and Apple may be sitting down to discuss patents and infringement, but the legal battle between the two companies is far from over. According to a report from FOSS Patents, Samsung accused Apple of infringing on eight patents in a California lawsuit filed last Wednesday. Rather than target only mobile devices in this suit, Samsung took out the big guns and is aiming at iPhones, iPads, Mac computers, Apple TV, iCloud and iTunes. This suit may be difficult for Samsung to win as two of the patents are FRAND patents which are essential to technology standards and must be licensed under fair and reasonable terms. Five patents, including the two FRAND patents, are from Samsung and three were acquired from Hitachi. Samsung has filed several lawsuits against Apple globally and has yet to win a judgment against the Cupertino company.
Apple ready to license its nano-SIM design for free, on one not-so-nano condition
If you hadn't heard, there are two rival nano-SIM designs going around, but there's only room for one of them to become an industry standard. Nokia, Motorola and RIM sit together in one corner, and we've already covered why they think their design is superior. On the other side of the ring sits Apple, which has its own tactics for bringing ETSI, the European Telecoms Standards Institute, over to its way of thinking. According to a legal letter shown to FOSS Patents by a "perfectly reliable source", Apple is prepared to license its nano-SIM design royalty-free, so long as it becomes the new standard and all other nano-SIM patent holders reciprocate the gesture. Such a gambit may not appease Cupertino's rivals and it certainly doesn't address their technical concerns, but it might show that Apple isn't looking to profit out of this particular format war and is simply continuing its quest for greater clarity on FRAND licensing terms. Then again, it could all just be lawyer-speak.Update: Nokia has responded to Apple's move, making it clear that it still prefers its own design. Mark Durrant, director of communications for the Finnish firm said, "the principal issues remain the technical superiority of our proposal and that Apple's proposal does not meet the pre-agreed ETSI requirements... Apple's proposal for royalty free licensing seems no more than an attempt to devalue the intellectual property of others." We expect this to go back and forth a few more times.
Apple loses ITC ruling against Motorola Mobility in patent infringement case
Florian Mueller over at FOSS Patents noted yesterday that Apple's patent infringement case against Motorola Mobility has been dealt a nearly fatal blow in the courts of the United States International Trade Commission (ITC). The suit alleged that Motorola Mobility was infringing on three Apple patents: one all-important patent for a multipoint touchscreen, an "object-oriented system locator system" patent, and a patent for an "ellipse fitting for multi-touch surfaces." The ITC's preliminary ruling in January found no proof that Moto was infringing on Apple's patents, and Friday's final ruling (PDF) upheld the initial finding. That doesn't make this the end of the road for Apple in the fight against Motorola Mobility. In fact, Mueller notes that the company will most likely appeal the decision in a U.S. Federal Circuit Court, as it is doing with another ITC ruling that found in favor of smartphone manufacturer HTC. There is a much better chance that the Federal Courts will overturn the ITC ruling, but Mueller says that this will take a significant amount of time. Smartphone-related patent infringement claims at the ITC tend to have a very high drop-out rate, so many manufacturers are now taking cases to German courts for "fast and furious" decisions. Mueller notes that the courts in Munich and Mannheim are twice as speedy as the ITC, and patent holders like Apple often win favorable rulings. This explains Apple's reasoning in taking a number of other patent infringement complaints to the German courts for swift rulings that result in injunctions on sales of new products.
German court guns down third Samsung patent lawsuit, plus one from Apple
Mannheim judge Andreas Voss is nothing if not decisive. FOSSPatents reports he's just thrown out a third Samsung v. Apple patent lawsuit relating to use of the 3G/UMTS standard. Not to be one-sided, he's also rejected the first of two Apple v. Samsung cases involving slide-to-unlock patents. Weirdly, this latter decision appears to contradict a recent ruling by a Munich court that upheld a similar slide-to-unlock claim by Apple against Motorola, but Judge Voss and his trigger-finger aren't bothered. Keep it up old boy, and maybe we can have this whole thing nailed by the summer. Oh wait, no, both sides are expected to appeal.
ITC rules Apple didn't violate S3 Graphics' patents
According to the FOSS Patents Blog, earlier today the US International Trade Commission entirely dismissed the first S3 Graphics complaint against Apple. Interestingly, the official notice (PDF link) has no explanation why the Administrative Law Judge was overruled. There is still one pending complaint by S3 Graphics against Apple which has not been ruled on. Part of what makes this an issue is that HTC is in the process of buying S3 Graphics, and a couple of strikes against Apple patent-wise would have just sweetened that deal. At least we don't have to wait long for more progress on the ITC front, as a date of December 6th has been set for a ruling on Apple's first complaint against S3 Graphics. And don't forget there's still a bit of tussling between Apple and HTC going on as well, with a patent infringement throwdown still not yet decided between them, either. Whew! It's all a bit confusing at first glance, so get comfy, get ready to take some notes, and head over to the FOSS Patents Blog for more information and links to other coverage that will help you make sense of all the legal wrangling.
Apple could get temporary suspension of Motorola injunction
On Friday, a German court granted Motorola an injunction against Apple and awarded damages in a patent infringement case. This ruling was a default judgment handed to Motorola because Apple, for some unknown reason, failed to defend itself in this case. Much confusion exists over the impact of this decision. Apple responded in a statement to CNET and claimed "This is a procedural issue and has nothing to do with the merits of the case." Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet also said, "It does not affect our ability to do business or sell products in Germany at this time." According to FOSS Patents, the key words in Apple's statement are "at this time." Apple could petition the German court and will likely receive a temporary suspension of the default judgment. This request for a second judgment, based on the merits of the case and not on a default decision, could bring the case all the way to the Federal Court of Justice and could take years to complete. If Apple fails to convince the courts to grant a temporary stay, this injunction could have a material impact on Apple's business in Germany. As of the writing of this post, Apple has not filed for a temporary suspension but could do so within the next two weeks. For full analysis of this sticky legal situation, you should read Florian Mueller's report which includes input from German lawyers.
Daily Update for October 17, 2011
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.
Oops: Android contains directly copied Java code, strengthening Oracle's case (updated)
Florian Mueller has been killing it these past few months with his analysis of various tech patent suits on his FOSSpatents blog, and today he's unearthed a pretty major bombshell: at least 43 Android source files that appear to have been directly copied from Java. That's a big deal, seeing as Oracle is currently suing Google for patent and copyright infringement in Android -- which isn't a hard case to prove when you've got 37 Android source files marked "PROPRIETARY / CONFIDENTIAL" and "DO NOT DISTRIBUTE" by Oracle / Sun and at least six more files in Froyo and Gingerbread that appear to have been decompiled from Java 2 Standard Edition and redistributed under the Apache open source license without permission. In simple terms? Google copied Oracle's Java code, pasted in a new license, and shipped it. Now, we've long thought Google's odd response to Oracle's lawsuit seemingly acknowledged some infringement, so we doubt this is a surprise in Mountain View, but we're guessing handset vendors aren't going to be so thrilled -- especially since using Android has already caused companies like HTC and Motorola to be hit with major patent lawsuits of their own. We'll see what happens, but in the meantime you should definitely hit up Florian's site for the full dirt -- it's some 47 pages worth of material, and it's dense, but if you're into this sort of thing it's incredibly interesting. Update: It appears things aren't this simple, but they're still not great. Check here for the latest.
