<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>Engadget RSS Feed</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com</link>
<description>Engadget</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2013 AOL Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Washington court rules Motorola can get millions, not billions, from Microsoft for its patents]]></title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/25/washington-court-rules-motorola-can-get-millions-not-billions/?utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/25/washington-court-rules-motorola-can-get-millions-not-billions/</guid>
<comments>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/25/washington-court-rules-motorola-can-get-millions-not-billions/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments</comments>
<description>
<![CDATA[
<p class="image-container" style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/25/washington-court-rules-motorola-can-get-millions-not-billions/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget"><img alt="Washington court rules Motorola can get millions, not billions, from Microsoft for its patents" data-src-height="320" data-src-width="580" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2013/04/motorola-microsoft-washington.jpg" /></a></p><p> Among the many patent cases currently ongoing between Motorola and Microsoft is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/11/microsoft-wins-injunction-in-washington-against-motorola-can-ke/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">one in US District Court</a> in the state of Washington concerning standards-essential WiFi and h.264 patents. <em>AllThingsD</em> reports that while Motorola was requesting billions in royalties for the technology it owns, Judge James Robart -- who invalidated a number of its patent claims <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/07/judge-invalidates-13-motorola-patent-claims-against-microsoft/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">a few months ago</a> -- ruled it's entitled to around $1.8 million per year. The reason given? There are so many patents that are part of the h.264 standard, that if every patent were licensed at the amount Motorola sought, those fees would be more than the current cost of the Xbox 360. And, Judge Robart found that Motorola hadn't proven its patents were more valuable than those of other companies included in the same pool. All 207 pages of the decision are available beyond the source link if need more info on the hows and whys of today's decision. <em>ATD</em> also has quotes from each company, and while Microsoft called it a good decision for consumers, Motorola chose to acknowledge the decision, but didn't hint at any reaction or future moves.</p>
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/gaming/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Gaming</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/microsoft/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Microsoft</a></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/25/washington-court-rules-motorola-can-get-millions-not-billions/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments">Comments</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Via:</strong> <a target="_blank" href="http://allthingsd.com/20130425/court-denies-motorola-the-billions-it-wanted-from-microsoft-for-standard-essential-patents/">AllThingsD</a><!--//--></p>
<p><strong>Source:</strong> <a target="_blank" href="http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/engadget/files/Microsoft_Moto_h264_decision.pdf">Court ruling [PDF]</a><!--//--></p>
]]>
</description>
<category>frand</category><category>google</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>microsoft</category><category>motorola</category><category>patent</category><category>ruling</category><category>sep</category><category>xbox360</category>

<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:16:00 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:identifier>21|20549385</dc:identifier>

</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[HTC insists Nokia's injunction won't affect the One's current stock, new mics in the works]]></title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/24/htc-nokia-injunction/?utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/24/htc-nokia-injunction/</guid>
<comments>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/24/htc-nokia-injunction/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments</comments>
<description>
<![CDATA[
<p class="image-container" style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/24/htc-nokia-injunction/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget"><img alt="HTC Nokia's injunction doesn't apply to the One" data-src-height="401" data-src-width="400" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2013/04/htcnokiainjunction.jpg" /></a></p><p> In an email to press, HTC took the opportunity to make a few clarifications about the injunction <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">filed by Nokia</a> this week regarding the dual-membrane microphone in the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/12/htc-one-review/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">One</a>. The preliminary injunction claims that the high-amplitude mic, which HTC uses in its flagship device, was supposed to be manufactured exclusively for the Finnish company (and currently used in the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/19/nokia-lumia-720-review/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">Lumia 720</a>). If you've been wondering how this particular action would affect sales of the high-end HTC handset, spokespeople assure us that it's business as usual for the company. According to its official statement, the One is not the actual target of any injunction in The Netherlands -- in actuality, the legalities of the matter are apparently only between Nokia and STMicroelectronics, the supplier of the component in question.</p><p> HTC tells us that Nokia's attempts to institute a recall of the One failed; since the products were purchased in good faith, the ruling states that HTC can continue to use microphones that are in its inventory. Despite having a history rich in <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/12/htc-confirms-one-shipment-delays-shifts-global-rollout-to-april/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">manufacturing delays</a>, we're told that this legal ruling will have no effect on the One's availability. The Taiwanese phone maker plans a transition to "improved microphone designs" as soon as its current stock of STM supplies has been exhausted, a move which HTC claims will be transparent to consumers. Head below to see the full statement.</p>
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Cellphones</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/wireless/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Wireless</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mobile/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Mobile</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/htc/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">HTC</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/nokia/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Nokia</a></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/24/htc-nokia-injunction/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments">Comments</a></strong></p>


]]>
</description>
<category>htc</category><category>injunction</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>netherlands</category><category>nokia</category><category>stm</category><category>stmicroelectronics</category>

<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad Molen]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:41:00 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:identifier>21|20548623</dc:identifier>

</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Judge dismisses lawsuit against NYC taxi-hailing app pilot]]></title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/nyc-taxi-e-hailing-pilot-lawsuit-dismissed/?utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/nyc-taxi-e-hailing-pilot-lawsuit-dismissed/</guid>
<comments>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/nyc-taxi-e-hailing-pilot-lawsuit-dismissed/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments</comments>
<description>
<![CDATA[
<p class="image-container" style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/nyc-taxi-e-hailing-pilot-lawsuit-dismissed/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget"><img alt="Judge dismisses lawsuit against NYC taxi-hailing app pilot" data-src-height="500" data-src-width="334" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2013/04/ubernyc.jpg" /></a></p><p> Taxi hailing apps have had a <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/16/uber-shuts-down-new-york-city-taxi-beta/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">rough time</a> getting started in the Big Apple. After the city's Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) put the kibosh on <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/Uber/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">Uber</a> and subsequently <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/12/13/nyc-taxi-commission-votes-yes-one-year-apps-trial/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">blessed e-hailing apps</a> with a 12-month test, the TLC faced a setback of its own: a lawsuit. Filed in March by 10 livery (black car) service outfits against the TLC and New York City, the suit packed seven complaints and temporarily put the pilot on hold. Among the claims were concerns that the program clouds the legal distinction between black cars and yellow medallion taxis, that it puts the elderly at a disadvantage and would enable cab drivers to discriminate by refusing service to certain passengers. Today, a judge dismissed the suit and lifted the order, clearing the way for the year-long trial to progress. There's no word on just when Uber and the likes of other e-hailing apps will be allowed to operate, but with legal hurdles out of the way, that should happen fairly soon.</p>
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/transportation/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Transportation</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mobile/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Mobile</a></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/nyc-taxi-e-hailing-pilot-lawsuit-dismissed/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments">Comments</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Via:</strong> <a target="_blank" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/judge-oks-plan-to-test-out-letting-nyc-taxi-passengers-summon-cabs-electronically/2013/04/23/8dbef400-ac56-11e2-9493-2ff3bf26c4b4_story.html">The Washington Post</a><!--//--></p>
<p><strong>Source:</strong> <a target="_blank" href="https://ia601704.us.archive.org/15/items/EhailDecision/Ehail%20Decision.pdf">City of New York</a><!--//--></p>
]]>
</description>
<category>lawsuit</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>NewYorkCity</category><category>NYC</category><category>taxi</category><category>taxis</category><category>Uber</category>

<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alexis Santos]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 20:17:00 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:identifier>21|20547948</dc:identifier>

</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[ITC tosses Motorola's sensor-based complaint against Apple]]></title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/itc-tosses-motorolas-complaint-against-apple/?utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/itc-tosses-motorolas-complaint-against-apple/</guid>
<comments>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/itc-tosses-motorolas-complaint-against-apple/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments</comments>
<description>
<![CDATA[
<p class="image-container" style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/itc-tosses-motorolas-complaint-against-apple/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget"><img alt="ITC Tosses Motorola's sensor-based complaint against Apple" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/10/2011-10-18-dsc02554.jpg" /></a></p><p> If you thought the patent war between Motorola (Google) and Apple was already over, you were mistaken. Though, today's decision by the ITC to toss Moto's complaint against Cupertino regarding the use of sensors to control the interface of a phone, might be one of the final blows struck. The claim over patent No. 6,246,862, was the last patent-in-suit standing from its <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/06/motorola-suing-apple-for-patent-infringement/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">2010 complaint</a> against Apple. Now it's been completely invalidated. The decision can still be appealed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and we can almost guarantee the company will take advantage of that option. (In fact, it already is with previous decisions that did not go in its favor.) With courts tossing out complaints <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/05/judge-dismisses-apple-lawsuit-versus-motorola-over-frand-patents/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">left</a> and <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/21/german-court-rules-that-motorola-samsung-dont-violate-apple-patent/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">right</a>, and some companies even willingly <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/02/motorola-withdraws-recent-itc-complaint-against-apple/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">withdrawing</a> them, we certainly keep hoping that the era patent Risk is coming to an end.</p><p> The ITC tossing out yet another complaint is a big loss for Motorola and Google. But, Apple has lost plenty of its own suits recently. It seems that both sides are settling into a stalemate. And ultimately pushing these competitors to innovate in the market instead of the courtroom is good for consumers.</p>
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Cellphones</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mobile/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Mobile</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/apple/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Apple</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/google/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Google</a></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/itc-tosses-motorolas-complaint-against-apple/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments">Comments</a></strong></p>

<p><strong>Source:</strong> <a target="_blank" href="http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/google-keeps-losing-itc-finally-tosses.html">FOSS Patents</a><!--//-->, <a target="_blank" href="http://usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/337/337_745_Notice04222013sgl.pdf">ITC (PDF)</a><!--//--></p>
]]>
</description>
<category>apple</category><category>breaking news</category><category>google</category><category>ITC</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>Motorola</category><category>PatentDispute</category>

<dc:creator><![CDATA[Terrence O'Brien]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:30:00 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:identifier>21|20547127</dc:identifier>

</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Nokia granted preliminary injunction against HTC in the Netherlands over high-amplitude mics]]></title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/?utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/</guid>
<comments>http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments</comments>
<description>
<![CDATA[
<p class="image-container" style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget"><img alt="Nokia granted injunction against HTC in the Netherlands over highamplitude mics " data-src-height="256" data-src-width="620" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2013/04/htcnokiainjunction.jpg" /></a></p><p> Don't worry, this time it's not a patent issue. However, it <em>is</em> more bad news for HTC's <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/12/htc-confirms-one-shipment-delays-shifts-global-rollout-to-april/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">already-delayed</a> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/12/htc-one-review/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">One</a>. Nokia has been granted an injunction by the Amsterdam district court concerning the technology HTC used in its current flagship. The legal battle involves a pair of high-amplitude mics housed within One's aluminum body, which are apparently the same dual-membrane components that Nokia's used in its recent <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/19/nokia-lumia-720-review/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget">Lumia 720</a>, seen above.</p><p> The Finnish company recently applied for a preliminary injunction, pointing the finger at STMicroelectronics, which is responsible for manufacturing the mic for both Nokia and HTC. According to our source, the issue is likely to be a breach of an NDA between Nokia and STMicroelectronics, as the phone maker asserts that the "<span>microphone components [were] invented by and manufactured exclusively for Nokia."</span><span> We're still hearing new details and will update as we learn more. We've also reached out to HTC for comment. For now, you can read up on Nokia's statement following the court's decision, embedded after the break.</span></p><p> <span><strong>Update:</strong> HTC has offered up an official statement in response to the injunction: "</span><span>HTC is disappointed in the decision. We are considering whether it will have any impact on our business and we will explore alternative solutions immediately."</span></p>
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Cellphones</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/wireless/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Wireless</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mobile/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Mobile</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/htc/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">HTC</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/nokia/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget" rel="tag">Nokia</a></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/22/nokia-preliminary-injunction-against-htc-one-mic/?utm_source=Feed_Classic&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Engadget#comments">Comments</a></strong></p>


]]>
</description>
<category>breaking news</category><category>HAAC</category><category>highamplitudemics</category><category>htc</category><category>injunction</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>legal</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>nokia</category><category>StElectronics</category>

<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mat Smith]]></dc:creator>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:36:00 -0400</pubDate>
<dc:identifier>21|20546873</dc:identifier>

</item>
</channel></rss>