Infringement -- Engadget

infringement posts

Samsung settles up with InterDigital in long-running patent infringement case

by Darren Murph posted Nov 25th 2008 at 9:29AM

At last, it's over. InterDigital, which is best known for its episodes in the courtroom with Samsung and Nokia, has finally reached an agreement with the former firm. The two have been at each other's throats since April of last year regarding patents allegedly used in some of Sammy's more sophisticated phones. The decision was reached just a day before the US International Trade Commission was set to rule on whether to recommend barring affected Samsung imports altogether, which we can assure you was not at all coincidental. There's been no public disclosure of settlement value, though one analyst at Hilliard Lyons estimates that Samsung will be coughing up $400 to $500 million over the next five years to make this problem go away. Talk about a recurring nightmare.

Garmin's Nuvifone comes under fire for trademark violations

by Joshua Topolsky posted Feb 27th 2008 at 5:16PM

Garmin probably thought getting into the mobile phone game would just be smooth sailing, but it looks like they've made a deadly miscalculation. Okay, that might be over-dramatizing the situation, but the PND-maker is facing a new lawsuit over its upcoming 3G wonder-device, the Nuvifone. Apparently, internet telephone provider Nuvio Corp. feels that Garmin has crossed trademark boundaries just a smidge, alleging the nav company is stepping all over its good name. "Our customers commonly refer to our service as the Nuvio phone," said Jason P. Talley, the company's CEO. Not only is the provider calling for a cease-and-desist on the use of "Nuvifone," but it also wants kickbacks for past infringement, and termination of the word "Nuvi" on any device made by Garmin. Garmin spokesman Ted Gartner says the company has been using the Nuvi name since early 2006 in North America, and earlier in Europe. He went on to add that they don't discuss pending litigation -- though we understand to friends and family he was like, "Pfft, whatever."

Broadcom wins major injunction against Qualcomm

by Evan Blass posted Dec 31st 2007 at 8:59PM

In the latest major twist in this epic battle between wireless chipmakers, a US District Judge has slapped a permanent injunction on any products containing those Qualcomm 3G chips ruled to be infringing on Broadcom's so-called '686 patents. Not only can Qualcomm no longer offer infringing devices nor the chips themselves in the US, the retroactive nature of the ruling means that the company can't even provide service or technical support for '686 products already on the market. At this point, with a voluntary licensing agreement seemingly off the table, the next move for Qualcomm is establishing a plan of action to show Judge James Selna how it plans to redesign its products into compliance. [Warning: PDF link]

[Via Reuters]

Sharp slaps Samsung with LCD patent infringement lawsuit

by Darren Murph posted Aug 7th 2007 at 11:48AM

As if the cutthroat price wars in the LCD space weren't demanding enough, Samsung is now being forced to attend to a lawsuit that Sharp just filed over LCD patent infringement. Reportedly, Sharp is seeking "compensation as well as the prohibition of sales of products that it alleges infringe five of its LCD patents, including one that relates to technology used to enhance display quality." The products in question include Samsung televisions and monitors as well as mobile handsets that feature Samsung's LCD modules. Unsurprisingly, Samsung refused to comment on pending litigation, but a Sharp spokeswoman went so far as to say that it had "been in talks with Samsung, but it appeared difficult to solve the matter through negotiations," which apparently led to a lawsuit being filed. So much for talking things out, eh?

Kodak sues Matsushita over patent infringement

by Joshua Topolsky posted Jul 27th 2007 at 7:47PM

Kodak, a name pretty much synonymous with the word "camera" in the past, and "crap" more recently, sued Japanese manufacturer Masushita (primary owner of Panasonic, amongst others), alleging the company infringed upon its digital camera patents. In documents filed in Texas, Kodak claims that the company violated patents for an "electronic camera utilizing image compression and digital storage," and "an apparatus and method for previewing motion images using a series of lower resolution still images." According to a Kodak spokesman, the company has tried to resolved the dispute "for a number of years," but the results haven't been up to snuff for the photography giant. Interestingly, Kodak has all but announced that it plans to bolster its earnings by milking kickbacks from the licensing of its intellectual property during its lengthy transition from a traditional photography company to a digital one. If the past is any indication, Matsushita can just crack the wallet right now.

RIAA demanding XM-Sirius pay higher royalty rates

by Darren Murph posted Jul 10th 2007 at 11:22AM

In the unceasing feud between the RIAA and satellite radio, the agency has rekindled the fire by encouraging the FCC to "require the merged companies to pay higher royalty rates to the record industry." Reportedly, the RIAA argued that the firms were "no longer new, struggling companies that could get away with paying below-market rates," and further salted the wound by insisting that the FCC "make clear that its approval of a merger was conditioned upon the continued protection of sound recordings from unlawful infringement." Of course, a number of senators have already voiced their concern for more limitations on satellite radio streams, but unsurprisingly, it seems like the RIAA wants these lofty wishes to become reality (and in a hurry).

IP Innovation sues Apple over violating obscure GUI patent

by Darren Murph posted Apr 25th 2007 at 9:51AM

Apparently, just about every graphical user interface that Apple churns out was patented and put on lock down ~~years~~ decades ago, as now a patent holding firm (IP Innovation) has filed a much-delayed lawsuit against the Cupertino-based outfit over its use of an OS interface. The patent in question dates back to 1984 via references in a 1991 filing by Xerox, which actually linked to GUI concepts drafted in the 1970s on the company's Alto workstations. Amazingly, the folks involved have just got around to slapping a lawsuit on Apple for selling OS X with "workspaces provided by an object-based user interface that appear to share windows and other display objects." The incredibly vague wording could realistically be used to target nearly every major OS that we've seen, and considering that Apple and Xerox already went a round in the legal ring back in 1989 over similar issues, this one certainly seems to lack substance. As expected, the $20 million claim was filed in the patent troll haven that is Marshall, Texas, and while we haven't heard word from an Apple spokesperson regarding the matter, we'd say there's a more pressing matter on the table for Jobs & Co. right now anyway.

Hitachi sues LG over plasma patent infringement, tries to halt US sales

by Darren Murph posted Apr 24th 2007 at 1:09PM

Just when Hitachi had us all believing that it was planning on reaching new heights in the plasma market thanks to a ginormous PDP set and a thirsty overseas crowd, now we're seeing the fallback plan. Of course, we can't really suggest that Hitachi's latest lawsuit on LG's (surprise, surprise) plasma displays have anything to do with the firm's dreary numbers, but it has nevertheless filed a lawsuit in the ill famed "district court in Texas" (read: patent troll heaven) saying that "the South Korean company infringed its plasma display-related patents." The suit seeks the obligatory "monetary compensation for damages," but more interesting is the tidbit that requests a "permanent injunction prohibiting LG's plasma display panel product sales in the United States." According to a Hitachi spokesperson, the two outfits had "been in talks regarding the appropriate licenses for these seven patents," but apparently, neither side is backing down anytime soon.

German police raiding CeBIT, wiping out infringing kiosks

by Darren Murph posted Mar 16th 2007 at 11:41PM

Talk about a royal buzzkill. It seems like several demonstrators at CeBIT are having their parties cut way short by German officials, as local customs and police offers have "confiscated products from the stand of at least one exhibitor on suspicion the devices infringed on MPEG audio patents." Currently, the authorities wouldn't divulge exactly which companies are getting nailed for patent infringement, but they did insinuate that most of the products in question made issue with "a portfolio of patents" that primarily focused on "MP3 players, MPEG2-compliant set-top-boxes, DVB satellite receivers, PDAs, and computer sound boards." It was stated that Mele Digital Technology was "targeted" and could be facing the stiff arm of the law, and while we certainly feel for those affected by bogus patent filings, this certainly isn't the first time a company has been embarrassingly interrupted while plugging its product line at a major trade show. Note to vendors: it's probably not in your best interest to bring along products that contravene with an outstanding patent, capiche?

Judge rules in favor of RIAA, XM ready for battle

by Darren Murph posted Jan 19th 2007 at 7:23PM

Not like this is altogether surprising by any means, but a US District Judge has ruled that a lawsuit in which "record companies allege XM Radio is cheating them by letting consumers store songs can proceed toward trial." Deborah A. Batts has decided to not throw out the case which Atlantic, BMG Music, Capitol Records, and "other music distribution companies" filed against XM, and claims that the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 does "not protect the company in this instance." Essentially, the judge ruled that special handheld recording devices, marketed as XM+MP3 players (you know, like the Inno), are not at all like "radio-cassette players," and then proceeded to explain how "recording songs played over free radio doesn't threaten the market for copyrighted works as does the use of a recorder which stores songs from private radio broadcasts." Aside from our apparent inability to understand why source A is less illegal than source B, we're completely on the same page with Ms. Batts, but nevertheless, she also asserted that XM is attempting to be "both a broadcaster and a distributor, while only paying to be the former," but completely disregards the extra fees that satellite radio firms pay to record labels in comparison to "free" stations. But if you think XM is downtrodden, you'd be sorely mistaken, as the company simply stated that it "looked forward to making its case (read: winning) in court." Now that's the spirit.

[Via Orbitcast]

Alcatel sues Microsoft regarding online video patent

by Cyrus Farivar posted Nov 22nd 2006 at 4:42AM

In yet another patent infringement case from Texas, French networking gear manufacturer Alcatel has just taken Microsoft to court for violating seven, count 'em, seven patents pertaining to fast-forward and rewind functions in online video streams. In a pair of suits filed in US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas this week, Alcatel is seeking damages for those alleged patent violations. As our buddies at PVR Wire point out, given that Alcatel worked with Microsoft to build an IPTV platform, it's likely that this will settle before this legal snowball gets too out of control -- that way, both parties could fast forward the outcome, too. Or would that be another violation?

[Via PVR Wire]

Pioneer suing Samsung over...well, you know the drill by now

by Evan Blass posted Sep 25th 2006 at 11:55AM

We'd like to take a moment to extend a hearty congratulations to consumer electronics stalwart Pioneer upon its very first entry into the ugly world of patent litigation. The Japanese manufacturer is suing Korea's Samsung Electronics and Samsung SDI -- no stranger to IP lawsuits, as it's also embroiled in disputes with Panasonic and Fujitsu -- for infringement of proprietary technology related to the production of plasma displays. Specifically, Pioneer claims that Samsung is violating patents pertaining to electrode configuration boosting display quality and a manufacturing step that increases display brightness -- pretty serious stuff, we know. For its part, Samsung says that it's planning to file a counter-suit, although this one may be just for posturing, as the company has apparently been in talks with Pioneer since April of last year concerning possible licensing agreements. Reuters points out that this move is the latest in a trend of aggressive intellectual property protection on the part of Japanese firms regarding potential infringement by their Asian rivals, with Panasonic and LG having recently settled a similar PDP-based brouhaha. We'll keep you posted on this one as it slowly winds its way through the courts, but at the very least it seems that investors aren't too concerned with Samsung's culpability here: Pioneer shares gained 0.72% on the news, while Samsung stock actually rose even more, by a total of 2.77%.

With "pod" on lockdown, Apple goes after "podcast"

by Evan Blass posted Sep 24th 2006 at 7:15PM

Now that Apple's lawyers have scared the pants off of small entrepreneurs selling products like the Profit Pod and TightPod -- items that have nothing to with portable audio in any way, mind you -- it seems that the next targets are companies that have the audacity to use the word "podcast" in their names. Wired's Listening Post blog is reporting that Steve's legal eagles have sent one of those scary cease and desist letters to a company called Podcast Ready, whose premier product, myPodder, gives users an automated way to download 'casts to their portable devices. CEO Russel Holliman claims that he'd consider changing the name of the program if necessary, but seems to be justifiably reticent about rebranding his entire business, considering the fact that "podcast" may not be "owned" by Apple nor even a derivative of "iPod" in the first place. Robert Scoble -- whose own company, PodTech, may be at risk in this witch hunt -- has weighed in on the issue by suggesting that the tech community as a whole adopt other terms like "audiocast" and "videocast" (or alternately, "audcast" and "vidcast") to describe this type of content, while other folks feel that fighting Apple and generating a ton of negative press for Cupertino is the best solution. Our take? Apple should be happy that its golden goose is getting so much free publicity, and if it isn't, we know of several companies that probably wouldn't mind if zencast, zunecast, or sansacast became the preferred terminology.

Update: BBHub's own Russell Shaw delves into this issue a little further over at ZDnet, and finds that Apple is having trouble getting certain iPod-related phrases trademarked, including the word "iPodcasting."

Read- Apple's nastygram
Read- Scoble's take
[Via calacanis.com]

Sony hit with another patent infringement suit

by Evan Blass posted Jul 17th 2006 at 4:07PM

More legal woes for Sony: the computing and consumer electronics giant is being sued by Pennsylvania-based Agere Systems over a number of devices spanning several product categories that, you guessed it, may be infringing upon some eight different Agere patents. Specifically, Agere is claiming that the PSP, PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3 -- along with several Vaio, Handycam, Walkman, and Location Free TV models -- are in violation of patents covering such varied technologies as a "wireless local area network apparatus" and "barrier layer treatments for tungsten plugs," whatever those are. Furthermore, the integrated circuit component manufacturer believes that Sony "willfully" violated the patents, and is thus seeking damages that could end up being three times what non-willful infringements would warrant. For its part, Sony is putting up a multi-pronged defense: its lawyers are first trying to get a judge to invalidate all of the patents and make the whole mess go away quickly; but if they do turn out to be valid, Sony is claiming that it's in the clear anyway due to cross-licensing deals dating back to 1989 with AT&T and Lucent Technologies (from whom Agere was spun off) that cover seven of the eight patents in question. Our uninformed legal opinion? Without knowing all of the specifics, it's difficult to ascertain who's got the stronger case here, but we can say that Sony's recent track record in fighting infringement accusations hasn't exactly been spotless, so as much as we'd love to cover yet another ugly, drawn-out court battle, maybe a quick settlement is the way to go with this one.

[Via PSP Fanboy]

Vonage sued again for patent infringement

by Thomas Ricker posted Jul 11th 2006 at 9:24AM

Move over Verizon, 'cause Klausner Technologies wants a crack at the telecommunication whipping boy du jour, Vonage. In yet another claim of patent infringement, Klausner, a patent holding company with 25 VoIP voicemail patents to its name, is seeking $180 million in damages and royalties to compensate the suffering endured by their private investors. This, after failing to convince Vonage to sign a licensing deal back in January like they did with Time Warner in April for the technology behind AOL Voicemail. And just in case you're taking odds on who'll sue whom next, Vonage just announced that it had acquired three unrelated VoIP patents for the compression of packetized digital signals allowing them to go after, and collect licensing fees from competitors like Motorola, Time Warner, Qwest, Sprint, and you guessed it, Verizon. Oh what a tangled web we weave.