judge
Latest
Amazon rejects Apple's false advertising claim in App Store suit
Amazon.com has filed a statement in Apple's ongoing claim against the online retail giant, saying that the generic use of the term "app store" is not a violation of Apple's "App Store" trademark. Amazon also asked for judgment regarding the suggestion that its use of "Appstore" to describe its own Android marketplace would be considered false advertising, in an attempt to somehow convince customers that the marketplace was related to Apple's own iOS App Store. Amazon also cites Steve Jobs and other Apple executives as calling competitors' markets "app stores" as well. Apple has trademarked the phrase "App Store," in reference to its own very popular iOS apps marketplace. But Amazon says this isn't even a question of trademark just yet -- it's simply trying to get a judge to agree that using the phrase "appstore" isn't false advertising. We should hear a decision on this filing coming up sometime soon.
Samsung 'likely to add' the iPhone 5 to its Apple lawsuit
The Wall Street Journal reports that Samsung is "likely" to add Apple's new iPhone 5 to its ongoing patent lawsuit against the company from Cupertino because, well, why not, right? Apple demolished Samsung in the recent ruling, and Samsung is now carrying out a second lawsuit against eight more patents, so the iPhone 5 may be thrown in there as well. A Samsung representative tells the WSJ that it will need to "analyze" the device first, but if it finds any evidence of infringement, it'll get thrown on the pile of evidence already set up for the case. This new case will be tried by the same judge, Lucy Koh, and there's a hearing next Wednesday for the three parties to figure out how the case should proceed. Right now, the actual trial is tenatively scheduled for sometime in March of next year, so Samsung should have plenty of time to do its "analysis" and get the iPhone 5 in the casework, too.
Judge rules Facebook users can share friends' profiles with the feds
It's not the backdoor access that the FBI has been pushing for, but US District Judge William Pauley III has now ruled that it and other law enforcement agencies are entitled to view your Facebook profile if one of your "friends" gives them permission to do so. As GigaOm reports, that ruling comes as part of a New York City racketeering trial, in which one of the accused, Melvin Colon, had tried to suppress evidence turned up on Facebook that led to his indictment. That information was obtained through an informant who gave investigators access to the profile, something that Colon had argued violated his rights against unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment. In the ruling, Judge Pauley dismissed that claim, likening the Facebook access instead to a phone wiretap in which one person on the call allows the government to monitor it -- a practice that has been ruled constitutional. GigaOm also has the ruling in its entirety at the source link below for those interested.
Schiller testifies, says Apple considered car and a camera, and Samsung's phone's a 'rip off'
Apple's Phil Schiller took the stand this afternoon, wearing a sharp suit, in Apple's ongoing case with Samsung in a California court. He revealed a few hints at Apple's iPhone development and took some solid shots at Samsung. In terms of Apple history, Schiller revealed that, before Apple began exploring the world of smartphones, it considered making a camera or a car. I'd love to see Apple make either one of those things, but of course they went with a cellphone, and the iPhone is that product. Schiller also had strong words for Samsung, reportedly saying "copy," "steal" and "rip off" to describe Samsung's work. Objections to his testimony were reportedly overridden. During Schiller's cross-examination, it sounds like Samsung tried to get him to agree that the iPhone's design wasn't entirely original, in that many of the designs included are simply functional, defined by common sense rather than Apple's design prowess. But according to the reports, Schiller didn't give much ground (and he still found room, at least, to correct the cross-examiner's pronunciation of designer Sir Jonathan Ive's last name -- it's NOT pronounced "Ivy," in case you were wondering). All in all, it sounds like Schiller is doing plenty for Apple's case in the ongoing litigation. He's starting out from a biased point, obviously, but if Apple can convince the judge in the case that Samsung did infringe on copyright, Apple's ownership of the modern smartphone design will be locked down once and for all. The AllThingsD running commentary notes that Scott Forstall followed Schiller as a witness, but didn't get a chance to say much before the lunch recess. He did recount the story of Steve Jobs barging in on his job interview with NeXT in 1992. #next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
UK judge forces Apple to state on its site that Samsung didn't copy the iPad
Apple is being forced by a British judge to state explicitly that Samsung didn't copy its iPad design. According to Bloomberg, Judge Colin Birss said that Apple has to post a notice both on its website and several British newspapers and magazines, to help correct the "damaging impression the South Korea-based company was copying Apple's product." The online part will reportedly stay there for six months. Apple lost its case against Samsung in the UK earlier this month, with the same judge awkwardly branding the 10-inch Android tablet "not as cool" as the iPad.
UK Judge says Galaxy Tab 'not as cool' as iPad, awards Samsung win in design suit
How's that for the ultimate backhanded legal award? A judge in the UK handed a win to Samsung in an intellectual property dispute, calling the Galaxy Tab "not as cool" as the iPad, and therefore not likely to get confused with Apple's tablets. Adding insult to lawsuit win, Judge Colin Birss said that Samsung's slates "do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design." The Galaxy Tabs are distinct from the iPad given their thinner form factors and the "details" on the backs of the devices, according to the judge. If Apple's not happy with his too-cool-for-suit ruling, he also gave Cupertino 21 days to appeal.
Judge dismisses Apple vs. Motorola in its entirety, companies unable to prove damages
After tentatively shutting down (and reviving) Apple and Motorola's legal spat, Judge Richard Posner has put the lid on the case once and for all, dismissing it in its entirety this evening. Neither company was able to satisfy the Judge's call for proof of damages, causing him to dismiss the case and block both firms from refiling claims. "It would be ridiculous to dismiss a suit for failure to prove damages and allow the plaintiff to refile the suit so that he could have a second chance to prove damages." Posner said, "This case is therefore dismissed with prejudice; a separate order to that effect is being entered today." Posner's dismissal with prejudice means that Apple and Motorola's claims cannot be brought before the court again. Guess they'll have to find something else to fight over, eh? Check out the Judge's full opinion after the break.
Apple, HTC ordered by judge to sit down, try and make nice on August 28th
There's a trend starting to emerge of judges wanting Apple to talk settlements with others rather than duke it out in the courtroom. Just two weeks after Apple and Samsung were steered towards talking about a potential deal, a Delaware court has ordered Apple and HTC to meet on August 28th in the hopes that they could shake hands and put an end to an increasingly hectic legal battle under the eyes of a mediating judge. Whether or not that happens is very much up in the air. Apple CEO Tim Cook has said he's not a fan of lawsuits, but he hasn't showed indications that he would take legal action off the table just yet. Likewise, HTC is no doubt eager to eliminate phone shipping delays stemming from Apple's court wins, but the lack of immediate pressure and the hopes of winning countersuits might lead it to hold off. Still, if the court's ideal vision of the world comes to pass, you could see HTC's Cher Wang shopping in an Apple Store without staff giving her the evil eye. [Image credit: mobile01]
ITC judge finds Apple in violation of Motorola WiFi patent
Motorola scored a win with the US International Trade Commission this week in its on-going patent battle with Apple. The commission's Judge Thomas Pender ruled that Cupertino is in violation of a Motorola WiFi patent -- one of four patents included in a complaint filed by the RAZR maker back in October 2010. Before the ITC actually goes so far as blocking the import of Apple products, however, the ruling is subject to review by the commission. The decision follows another patent win for Motorola, handed down by the ITC yesterday in a dispute with Microsoft. Update: Motorola sent along the following, not surprisingly chipper statement on the matter: We are pleased that the ALJ's initial determination finds Apple to be in violation of Motorola Mobility's intellectual property, and look forward to the full commission's ruling in August. Our commitment to innovation is a primary reason why we are an industry-leader in intellectual property, and our focus continues to be on building on this strong foundation to enhance the user experience.
German court upholds ban on iCloud and MobileMe push emails
It's been well over a month now since Apple suspended push email from its iCloud and MobileMe services, and it doesn't look like it will be switching them back on any time soon. According to the Wall Street Journal, a German regional court has backed the ban, upholding Motorola Mobility's claims of patent infringements. The court agreed that Apple must also pay damages to Motorola, but has yet to agree on an amount. So, for now, users will need to stick to manually fetching updates, and hope a final agreement can be met further down the line.
Atari updates rules and deadline, adds judge to Pong developer contest
(Disclaimer: I am serving as a judge in this contest for Atari, though I'm not getting paid or compensated in any way for contributing my time.) After Atari announced a recent contest to encourage iOS developers to come up with new ideas for a Pong-style remake, there was feedback among the iOS community in general that the terms for the new contest were a little too limiting. Specifically, Atari is basically offering a share of earnings from the final published app as prize money (in addition to a series of cash prizes, including $50,000 for first place), and some developers have said that's a bad deal to take. Now, Atari tells TUAW that it has updated the rules on the contest, and as Atari says, "are intended to offer developers larger incentives for participation and increase their potential revenue as a result of their winning Pong submission." The biggest change is that winning developers will now share revenue with Atari for a longer period of time, from one year up to three years. That should provide a extra revenue for devs who win, and maybe encourage anyone turned off by the initial rules to reconsider. Additionally, Atari will be putting all of the winners in a "Developer Spotlight" page on its official site, so everyone can see the fruits of the contest when they're announced in June. And finally, David Whatley (of Critical Thought Games, maker of Tiny Heroes and geoDefense) is going to join the judging panel, which also includes Atari founder Nolan Bushnell, Pocket God's Dave Castelnuovo, and me, TUAW editor Mike Schramm. Entries are now going to be accepted until April 15, 2012, so if you have an idea for a new take on Pong, be sure to submit it over on the official site. Yes, for experienced developers who already have the experience and ability to publish and promote apps on the App Store, this might not be for you -- aside from the Pong trademark itself, why go through Atari when you can do it on your own? But for devs with a great Pong-centered idea and not a lot of resources to back it up, joining up with Atari in this way could be a real windfall. Good luck to everyone who enters.
Apple denied request to continue litigation against bankrupt Kodak
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper said Thursday that Apple cannot pursue litigation against Kodak while the camera company is still in bankruptcy, says a Reuters report. The judge said it would be an "inappropriate way forward" to let Apple pursue current court cases or file new ones at this time. Last month, Apple asked the court to lift the stay that stopped a heated court case between the two companies over digital photography patents Kodak owns. This case was put on hold when Kodak filed for bankruptcy. As part of the bankruptcy process, Kodak wants to sell off its patent portfolio which includes the patent at the heart of this case. Apple, however, wants to stop Kodak from selling the patent and threatened to file new litigation until a decision is made on this patent dispute. Now that litigation is no longer an option, Kodak and Apple must go back to the drawing board and resolve this patent dispute in a way that does not interfere with Kodak's bankruptcy case.
Do we have the right to be 'forgotten' on Google? Spain asks ECJ to investigate
Google has already tasted European hot water over its revised privacy policy, and soon the European Court of Justice (ECJ) may expand its remit to consider other related issues too. Spanish judges are asking the top court to consider complaints from 100 Spaniards who wish to have their names removed from news articles and websites. Among the complainants are a plastic surgeon who wants to delete archived references to a botched operation, and a man who appears on the Google News aggregator for alleged non-payment of social security. Google itself told Reuters that it supports the "right to be forgotten," but only if it's applied to search engines "in a way that protects both the right to privacy and the right to free expression." If only life was as simple as Pay N' Spray.
Authorities decrypt laptop without defendant's help, Fifth Amendment need not apply
Constitutional junkies have had their eyes on Colorado for awhile now, because a federal judge there ordered a woman to decrypt her hard drive in a criminal trial. This, despite her cries that doing so would violate her Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination. The argument is now moot, as authorities have managed to access the laptop's data without any aid from the defendant, thereby obviating any Constitutional conundrums. Who knows if the feds found the evidence of bank-fraud they were looking for, or whether it was brute force or a lucky guess that did the trick, but at least we can say it's the last of the laptop-related Fifth Amendment court cases for awhile, right?
Court upholds Fifth Amendment, prevents forced decryption of data
When our forefathers were amending the constitution for the fifth time, they probably didn't have TrueCrypt-locked hard drives in mind. However, a ruling from the 11th Circuit Appeals Court has upheld the right of an anonymous testifier to not forcibly decrypt their data. The case relates to a Jon Doe giving evidence in exchange for immunity. The protection afforded to them under this case wouldn't extend to any other incriminating data that might be found, and as such Doe felt this could lead to violation of the fifth amendment. The validity of the prosecution's demands for the data decryption lies in what they already know, and how they knew it -- to prevent acting on hopeful hunches. The prosecutors were unable to demonstrate any knowledge of the data in question, leading the 11th Circuit to deem the request unlawful, adding that the immunity should have extended beyond just the current case. This isn't the first time we've seen this part of the constitution under the digital spotlight, and we're betting it won't be the last, either.
Kodak gets court approval to borrow $950 million, end theater sponsorship
Kodak took another step along the road to recovery yesterday, after receiving court approval to borrow $950 million in restructuring funds. Nearly a month after the camera maker filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, US Bankruptcy Judge Allen Gropper granted Kodak's request on Thursday, allowing the company to continue operations during its ongoing transition. Gropper's decision, handed down in a Manhattan court, follows a series of negotiations between Kodak and its lenders, and adds an extra $300 million to the $650 million awarded during January's Chapter 11 filing. The company is also allowed to end its sponsorship of the Kodak Theatre in Los Angeles, after successfully arguing that doing so would be in the best interest of Kodak and its creditors. Under the deal, Kodak is obliged to pay $72 million over the course of 20 years. It currently shells out $3.6 million per year and still has $38 million in outstanding payments, but Kodak's lawyers argued that the agreement was too costly. Kodak Chairman and CEO Antonio Perez issued the following statement in response to yesterday's decision: "Today's agreement is another step towards ensuring that Kodak is positioned to execute on the goals the Company set out last month: Bolster our liquidity in the U.S. and abroad, monetize our non-strategic intellectual property, fairly resolve legacy liabilities, and enable Kodak to focus on its most valuable business lines."
German court dismisses Motorola's patent lawsuit against Apple
Motorola suffered a setback in Germany this morning, after a Mannheim Regional Court struck down one of the company's several patent lawsuits against Apple. The patent in question, EP1053613, is considered essential to the 3G/UMTS wireless standard and, more specifically, pertains to a "method and system for generating a complex pseudonoise sequence for processing a code division multiple access [CDMA] signal." Motorola Mobility had argued that Apple's products infringed upon this patent, but Judge Andreas Voss today dismissed these claims, on the basis that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate Cupertino's violation. It's undoubtedly a welcomed victory for Apple, which had been suffering through something of a losing streak against Motorola, but their ongoing tug-of-war is far from over. Neither Motorola nor Apple have commented on the decision.
Motorola wins permanent injunction against Apple's iCloud in German court (update: ban lifted)
There's another legal brouhaha brewing in Germany, where Motorola today won an injunction against Apple's iCloud. In a decision handed down from the infamous Mannheim Regional Court this morning, Judge Andreas Voss issued a permanent injunction against Cupertino's cloud-based service and any devices that use it, following a complaint that Motorola originally filed in April of last year. The two companies, as you may recall, have been going at each other rather aggressively in Germany, where Motorola scored a similar victory, back in November. At issue in today's ruling is a European Patent that outlines a "multiple pager status synchronization system and method," upon which iCloud, Motorola claims, infringes. The injunction, as FOSS Patents explains, targets Apple's Ireland-based European distribution branch, but it only applies to the German market -- not Europe, as a whole. And while it's technically "permanent," it's still "preliminarily enforceable," which means Apple can (and likely will) appeal. Motorola, meanwhile, can seek to enforce it, if it's willing to post a €100 million bond. Apple had been seeking a bond of €2 billion, but was ultimately denied. For more of the legal nitty gritty, check out the source link below.Update 1: Citing a statement from Apple, Germany's Deutsche Presse-Agentur news agency is now reporting that the company has pulled the iPhone 3G, the iPhone 3GS, and the iPhone 4 from its German online store, along with any 3G/UMTS-enabled iPads. The move appears to come in response not to today's ruling, but to a decision issued in December, when Motorola won an injunction against Apple, on the grounds that its 3G/UMTS technology infringes upon one of Moto's European patents. According to FOSS Patents, Apple presumably lost its appeal to the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court, after Motorola sought to enforce the injunction. Update 2: Apple has formally responded to each of today's events, confirming its plans to appeal the court's ruling on iCloud, and explaining its reasoning for pulling its products. "Apple believes this old pager patent is invalid and we're appealing the courts decision," the company said in an e-mailed statement to PaidContent. As for the 3G/UMTS case, Apple says it's still lobbying for a reversal, and that the pulled devices are still available at brick-and-mortar retailers within Germany. "While some iPad and iPhone models are not available through Apple's online store in Germany right now, customers should have no problem finding them at one of our retail stores or an authorised reseller," the statement reads. "Apple is appealing this ruling because Motorola repeatedly refuses to license this patent to Apple on reasonable terms, despite having declared it an industry standard patent seven years ago." Update 3: And just like that, the BBC is reporting that Apple's exhortations have been heard, and the ban has been lifted. Details are few, but Cupertino had this to say about this latest turn of events: "All iPad and iPhone models will be back on sale through Apple's online store in Germany shortly."
ITC judge throws out Barnes and Noble's patent defense against Microsoft
Microsoft's patent dispute with Barnes and Noble is likely far from over, but the spat saw some movement today, when a judge at the International Trade Commission rejected the bookseller's patent misuse claim. In his ruling, ITC Judge Theodore Essex threw out B&N's argument that Microsoft is misusing its patents against Android, effectively nullifying the company's major defense against Redmond. Microsoft, as you'll recall, is targeting the retailer and its Nook e-reader for allegedly infringing upon a (declining) number of its Android-related patents. Essex's decision is still subject to review from a six-member panel, but Microsoft is already heralding his decision as an early victory. "Today's action by the ITC makes clear that Barnes & Noble's patent misuse defense was meritless," Microsoft Deputy General Counsel David Howard said in a statement. "This case is only about one thing -- patent infringement by Barnes & Noble's Android-based devices." Barnes and Noble, meanwhile, said it has no comment. A full trial on the case is scheduled to begin on February 6th.
German court rejects Samsung's second 3G patent complaint against Apple
About a week after suffering a legal setback in Germany, Samsung received another bit of bad news this morning, when the Mannheim Regional Court rejected the second of its patent infringement claims against Apple. As with last week's ruling, today's decision addresses one of Samsung's arguments that Apple's 3G / UMTS technology infringes upon its patents. Judge Andreas Voss officially shot down these claims early this morning, though he didn't offer an immediate reason for his ruling. As FOSS Patents points out, however, these initial decisions against Samsung may be based on the validity of the specific patents themselves, and would therefore have no bearing upon the outcome of the Korean manufacturer's three other claims -- all of which are based upon different 3G / UMTS patents. In addition, the company is pursuing two lawsuits based on patents not related to 3G standards, including one, apparently, that details a way to type smiley emoticons on a mobile handset. We're still awaiting more information on today's outcome and will update this post as soon as we hear more.
