PatentCase
Latest
Nokia gets nose bloodied in IPCom patent case, says it doesn't care anyway
Mannheim is gaining a reputation as the place where patent disputes go to die. The latest loser? Nokia, in a case against German firm IPCom. A saving grace for the Finnish firm, this time, seems to be that the patent in question was granted in February 2011 and all the handsets involved predate this, and are no longer on the market. That's according to the firm's spokesman at least, who also added that it would be seeking a ruling from a higher court to clarify whether current handsets are also affected by the ruling. Well, they do say things come in threes...
Government says it's got i4i's back in Word patent dispute
As the US Supreme Court prepares to hear yet another appeal in the seemingly unending patent dispute between Microsoft and XML specialists i4i next month, some pretty influential folks are starting to take sides -- officially. Perhaps most notably, Acting Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal filed an amicus brief backing i4i and a previous US Court of Appeals decision to uphold the $290 million judgement against the software giant. Other big guns backing i4i with amicus briefs include DuPont, 3M, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and GE. Of course, Microsoft's getting a little help from its friends with official I-got-you-bro statements coming from Google, Apple, Toyota, and Walmart. The appeal is expected to hit the Supreme Court in April and has big implications for patent litigation -- specifically, it could give tech giants like Microsoft more guts to go after patents held by little guys like i4i.
US Supreme Court agrees to hear Microsoft appeal in Word patent case
It's been quite a few months since we've seen any major developments in Microsoft's patent battle with Toronto-based i4i Inc over Microsoft Word, but it looks like things are now about to change in a big way. As The Wall Street Journal reports, the US Supreme Court has today agreed to hear Mircosoft's appeal in the case that dealt it $290 million in damages and prevented it from selling versions of Word that contained the allegedly infringing technology. That could not only have some pretty big ramifications for Microsoft in this particular case, but for patent law in general, as it gets to the very heart of the legal standard for determining the validity of a patent. Needless to say, we'll be watching this one very closely -- the court is expected to hear the case sometime next year.
Apple ordered to pay damages in Opti patent case, Apple appeals
Full-time IP licensor Opti sure has been keeping itself busy in the last few years suing the likes of NVIDIA, AMD and Apple, and it looks like its case with the latter may now finally be drawing to a close. After a few years of battling it out in the courts in Texas, the judge in the case has ordered Apple to pay Opti $19 million for three instances of patent infringement, as well as $2.7 million in pre-judgment interest. The judge didn't find that Apple willfully violated the patents in question, however, which concern a memory access technology known as predictive snooping (hence the relatively small damages). Apple apparently isn't quite ready to call it a day just yet though, and has reportedly already filed a formal appeal to have the case overturned.
Supreme Court to hear LG vs. Quanta patent case
It looks like LG and Qaunta's ongoing patent squabble is headed for the big time, with Reuters now reporting that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to step in and sort things out. This is not, however, the DVD-related LG vs. Quanta case that was filed back in July, but rather an entirely different LG vs. Quanta case that ultimately found the U.S. District Court for Northern California ruling against LG, only to have that ruling later overturned by a federal appeals court in July of 2006. According to Reuters, this particular case centers on the touchy issue of whether patent-holders can demand royalties from multiple companies during the manufacturing process -- a patent trail that's also caused a range of other manufacturers including Bizcom, Compal and Scepter to be roped into the case. If all goes as planned, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case "early next year," with a decision "likely" by the end of June.
TiVo awarded $90M and permanent injunction aginst EchoStar
Way back in April a jury agreed with TiVo that EchoStar willfully infringed upon TiVo's patent for a "multimedia time-warping system." Then crickets for the last 4 months as the two battled it out in both the court of public opinion and at a bench trial where TiVo requested a permanent injunction against the provider of the DISH Network. Well, the ruling is in and EchoStar must pay TiVo an initial award of about $90 million and must disable all infringing DVR functionality within, oh, 30 days -- we're talking switching off the DVR functionality of four million users. Ouch! Oh, and EchoStar can't sell new boxes, either. Is it just us or does little TiVo seem to be extra smiley this morning?[Thanks to everyone who sent this in, via Zatz Not Funny]Update: EchoStar is definitely going to attempt to stay the injunction (they'd be fools not to) -- more on that as it develops!Read - Reuters coverageRead - EchoStar's response
EchoStar to go for round 2 with TiVo
If you though TiVo and EchoStar were judged, settled, and ready to go their separate ways, think again. The $74 million windfall TiVo just got from their patent infringement suit against EchoStar is about to get all RIM / NTP on us. EchoStar filed a request late last year with the USPTO to reexamine TiVo's famous 1998 TiVo-secret-sauce patent (otherwise known as patent #6233389 for a "multimedia time warping system") -- almost two years into the case, not before -- and apparently they're now pressuring the judge presiding to stay judgment until word comes back from the patent office. Being that TiVo won the trial by jury and the judge has yet to hand down the final verdict, EchoStar can continue pressuring to stay the case until the patent has been reviewed, and accepted or rejected as novel / un-novel, then undoubtedly re-petitioned continuously by one party or the other until the system breaks down and someone -- like the judge -- gives up on the process. Will TiVo's judge be as harsh and unforgiving as James Spencer was with RIM in their battle with NTP? That's yet to be seen, but in a release on the judgment, EchoStar called the jury's verdict "the first step in a very long process" and expressed their belief that "the decision will be reversed either through post-trial motions or on appeal." In other words this has the makings of yet another patent-suit fiasco, and frankly we'd like none of it.[Thanks, Ryan]
