lucykoh
Latest
Yahoo could pay $117.5 million to settle data breach
Yahoo is back in the courtroom with a revised settlement proposal meant to make amends for its massive data breaches. If this proposal is approved, the company will pay $117.5 million.
Judge rejects Yahoo's proposed settlement over data breaches
Yahoo's proposed settlement over massive data breaches hasn't passed muster in the courtroom. Judge Lucy Koh has rejected the settlement from the company (now owned by Engadget parent Verizon) for not specifying how much victims could expect to recover. While the proposal included $50 million in damages and would pay $25 for every hour spent dealing with the breaches, Koh was concerned that it didn't reveal the scope of the settlement fund or the costs of the two years of promised credit monitoring. The judge was also worried the proposed class for the settlement was too large, as it didn't reflect the considerably smaller number of active users during the affected period.
Add this: LinkedIn must pay $13 million to annoyed users
Networking site LinkedIn has agreed to pay out $13 million for overzealous marketing of its services on behalf of users. You've likely received one of the emails, which appear to come from a contact (below), saying something like, "Hi, I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn." That line actually makes a fine universal cartoon caption, but LinkedIn then sent several similar follow-up emails without saying it would do so in its terms of service. Many users felt that made them look needy (the email mentions your contact's name no less than five times), which is why they launched a class-action suit against the company in Lucy Koh's California court.
Judge Koh denies Samsung a retrial following USPTO patent decisions (updated)
After the USPTO decided to take a second look at a bunch of Apple's patents, including the pinch-to-zoom claims later invalidated by the USPTO, Samsung was understandably pressing for a retrial. However, since then the court has certified most of the other IP in question, including the famous claim 19 or "bounce-back" of patent 7,469,381, a lynchpin in the $1 billion judgement favoring Cupertino. As a result, judge Lucy Koh has decided to ignore the Korean company's pleas and press on with Apple vs. Samsung II, meaning that the trial scheduled for November 12th 2013 will proceed as planned. What does that mean for all of us? Yet more legal wrangling and a prolonging of Samsung's California nightmare. Update: The article originally stated that the rubber-banding claim 21 in 7,469,381 was invalidated, but it was actually the pinch-to-zoom claim in patent 7,844,915. We apologize for any confusion that may have caused.
Apple points out possible $85M court error in Samsung case
Legal maneuverings continue in the landmark court case between Apple and Samsung in the Northern District of California. In the latest development reported by FOSS Patents, Apple is questioning Judge Lucy Koh's decision to vacate $450 million of the original $1.05 billion award. Apple claims an error by Judge Koh would increase the number of devices included in the damage determination from 14 to 16. This would add an additional $85 million onto the judgement, bringing it up from the $600 million awarded by Koh to a new $685 million figure requested by Apple. You can read more about the legal strategy behind Apple's objection in the article on FOSS Patents. [Via Apple Insider]
Judge urges Apple, Samsung lawyers to seek 'global peace'
Samsung and Apple faced off again on Thursday in a California courtroom. The pair met with Judge Lucy Koh to discuss a variety of topics including Apple's injunction against Samsung, the fairness of the US$1 billion award and the credibilty of jury foreman Velvin Hogan. During the proceedings, Koh encouraged the two sides to settle their differences, saying it would be good for consumers and for the industry. The two sides have repeatedly tried to negotiate a compromise, but they have failed to reach an agreement. The patent infringement dispute between the two companies spans multiple cases in several countries worldwide. Each side has won small victories, but the war between the two industry leaders is still going strong. [Via Engadget and The Verge]
Judge Koh: 'global peace' between Apple and Samsung would be 'good for consumers'
While Judge Lucy Koh may not pull down the same staggering wage or get as much TV time as that other well-known arbiter, she's just as outspoken in her own courtroom. While presiding yesterday over the neverending story that is Apple v. Samsung, she called for "global peace" between the two. Inciting chuckles from the crowd, she reaffirmed her point: "I'm not joking... it would be good for consumers and good for the industry." Head lawyer for Samsung said the company was "willing to talk," but the opposition wasn't so amicable, claiming that the billion-odd judgment in its favor was a mere "slap on the wrist," and that clear boundaries were necessary for setting a precedent. Cupertino's camp also attacked Samsung's design decisions, saying they were knowingly taken to the limit of what it could legally get away with, while the Korean manufacturer's team thinks Apple wants to "compete through the courts rather than the marketplace," and was using the courts to conduct a smear campaign. When commenting on the patent rows in a TV interview yesterday, Apple CEO Tim Cook repeated his stance on litigation, but said there was "no other choice," and that "in a perfect world," companies would "invent their own stuff." Sadly, it looks like Judge Koh's plea for resolution won't have much of an impact, but we're with her in thinking: if only this had all played out during a 10-minute segment on daytime TV.
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.
Apple, Samsung to argue potential bans on infringing phones December 6th in US District Court
Ardent followers of the Apple v. Samsung hearing in California have another date to circle in their calendars: December 6th. AllThingsD and Reuters report Judge Lucy Koh has put that down as the day the two companies can make their cases over two key steps in the process since the verdict (check out our breakdown of the decision and what its $1.05 billion damage award means here) was handed down Friday evening. Apple is requesting an injunction to block the sale of Samsung phones that were found to infringe upon its patents, while Samsung wants to have the jury's verdict set aside. This changes the plans for the previously scheduled September 20th hearing, which will focus on Samsung's effort to get the injunction lifted on its Galaxy Tab 10.1 that was found not to infringe upon Apple's design patent. Whether you'll be tuned in to Twitter for each line by line update or avoiding the internet altogether, at least now you know which day to plan for.
Apple, Samsung respond to the jury's decision; September 20th court date set for injunction hearing
Well. The verdict for the tech industry patent trial of the week is in, and the jury agreed with Apple's version of the events enough to award it a billion dollars and change in damages while awarding Samsung... nothing. Naturally, the two companies differ in their viewpoints on this ruling, with Apple celebrating a decision that supports its originality and innovation, and is "sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn't right." Samsung, on the other hand, claims it's all about standing up for the consumer, who it believes will be the true victim here, forced to pay more for fewer choices and less innovation now that one company has "a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners." Before we get to the inevitable appeals, Apple is seeking a preliminary injunction against Samsung's infringing products and Judge Lucy Koh has set September 20th as a date for the hearing. Apple has until the 29th to file its motion, which Samsung will have 14 days to respond to, before Apple has two days to craft a response of its own. While we all take a breather before the lawyers get back at it, you'll find the statements from both companies after the break. Update: As expected, Samsung has indicated it will appeal the ruling. Wall Street Journal's Evan Ramstad tweets that it plans to file post-verdict motions to overturn the decision and if those are unsuccessful, it will take its case to the Appeals Court.
Judge denies Apple's request for dismissal after Samsung evidence leak
Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's request for a judgment that would hand the company a victory in its patent infringement case with Samsung, according to Electronista. Apple made the request after Samsung deliberately defied Judge Koh's order by releasing excluded documents to the media. These documents suggest Apple copied Sony when it designed the iPhone. Despite repeated attempts by Samsung to include these documents in the trial, they were excluded because Samsung produced them too late in the proceedings. Samsung lawyer John Quinn defended the company's decision to release the documents by saying Samsung was acting in accordance with the Court's view that the "...workings of litigation must be open to public view." Quinn adds that Samsung only provided these documents when journalists requested them and that it "was not motivated by or designed to influence jurors." Apple said in its motion that Samsung "apparently believes that it is above the law, and that it-not this Court-should decide what evidence the jury should see." Apple adds that Samsung "engaged in bad faith litigation misconduct by attempting to prejudice the jury." Koh may have denied Apple an early win, but she did not rule out the possibility of other sanctions against Samsung. The trial will resume as expected on Friday afternoon. [Via Ars Technica] #next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Apple/Samsung suit begins today
The big patent infringement trial between Apple and Samsung kicks off today in a California court, as noted by The New York Times. With infringement claims pending against both companies, there's a lot at stake. As pointed out by Philip Elmer-DeWitt of Fortune's Apple 2.0, the trial can be summarized by the first few lines in each company's pre-trial brief. Apple: "Samsung is on trial because it made a deliberate decision to copy Apple's iPhone and iPad." Samsung: "In this lawsuit, Apple seeks to stifle legitimate competition and limit consumer choice to maintain its historically exorbitant profits." To help you get up-to-date on the long-standing dispute, The Verge has a detailed post describing both Samsung's case against Apple and Apple's case against Samsung. Written by Matt Macari and Nilay Patel, the post also tells you what to expect during the trial. You can also check out AllThingsD, which has a cheat sheet that spells out the major points of the legal battle; writer Ina Fried is covering the trial in person. [Via Fortune 2.0, The Verge and AllThingsD]
US court upholds ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales
Yesterday, U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh (at right) upheld her previous ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet sales in the U.S. On June 26, Judge Koh (of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose division) enjoined Samsung and its American subsidiaries from importing or selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 or any other product that "embodies any design contained in U.S. Design Patent No. D504,889." That patent covers the design of the iPad and was granted to Apple in 2005. After Judge Koh's enjoinment on June 26, Apple post a required US$2.6 million bond and the injunction took effect. Almost immediately, Samsung filed a motion to stay and suspend the injunction pending an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. After consideration, Judge Koh refused the motion, saying that Samsung had not established a likelihood of success on appeal. The Judge also commented that Samsung would not suffer irreparable damages under the ban, as they have other tablet products that do not infringe on the iPad design.
Apple denied stateside Galaxy S III injunction
Judge Lucy Koh has denied Apple's request for a domestic sales ban of Samsung's latest flagship. Her Honor put her foot down, saying that adding any more litigation to the already overcrowded docket would cause the courtroom action to be postponed again. Cupertino subsequently relented, eager to get the trial proper started, which is currently slated to begin on July 30th.
Apple v. Samsung judge yells 'get to the point, you two'
Judge Lucy Koh, presiding over the courtroom battle 'twixt Apple and Samsung has ordered that both companies slim down the bundle of litigation so its easy for juries to understand. The docket currently contains 16 patent violations, six trademark issues, five "trade dress" claims and an antitrust matter -- which her Honor Judge Koh described as a "cruel and unusual punishment" for a jury. If both companies can't get over a table and produce a Cliffs Notes edition of their global patent battle, then she'll postpone the trial date until 2013.
Samsung brings another eight patents to the Apple knife-fight
The Mamas and the Papas used to dream about it, but California's been turned from sunny idyll into blood-spattered battleground as the global conflict 'twixt Samsung and Apple continues. Samsung's pulled out a further eight patents to rebuke Apple's Northern District court injunction that's got designs on banishing the Galaxy Nexus from our shores. Two of the patents are licensed under FRAND terms, muddying the waters even further over the contentious subject of common patent sharing. Meanwhile, both company CEOs are being made to engage in sit-down talks with the hope that Judge Lucy Koh won't make them share a dorm room at summer camp.
