Last we checked we actually weren't in the Twilight Zone, but quite frankly, the bigwigs at Gibson just might be. Seemingly out of nowhere, the famed guitar manufacturer sparked up a lawsuit against Activision claiming that Guitar Hero titles violate one of its patents. Now the company appears to be on the warpath, suing Wal-Mart, Target, GameStop, Amazon, Toys 'R' Us and Kmart in an attempt to get the game off of store shelves. Reportedly, Gibson took "this action reluctantly, but is required to protect its intellectual property." For the retailers that did comment, they chimed in only to say "we aren't commenting," and judging by the looks of things, the games are still widely available -- for now.

It's fairly commonplace for Chinese manufacturers to crank out clones of other popular wares, but apparently, things aren't brushed off as easily when the cloning gets done by a mega-corp like Toshiba. Granted, quite a bit is lost in translation here, but the long and short of it is that NTT DoCoMo and Fujitsu are suing Tosh for creating and selling its 821T -- which, as you can see above, looks an awful lot like Fujitsu's RakuRaku handset. Reportedly, the plaintiffs have demanded that Softbank Mobile withdraw the 821T from the market, but it seems there's quite a bit more back-and-forth left to go down before the dust settles on this one.

[Via GearFuse]

We'll be straight with you -- we aren't surprised one iota by this one. For those keeping tabs, Samsung's slate of Blu-ray players have been plagued with issues essentially from day one, and while it has released a flurry of firmware updates over the years in an attempt to mend a variety of incompatibility issues, even its recent BD-UP5000 hybrid player is being axed early on after giving owners all sorts of fits. Apparently, one particular buyer isn't taking things lying down, and has decided to file suit against the mega-corp alleging that it has sold "defective Blu-ray players" to consumers. According to the suit, Sammy was "fully aware of the defective nature of the player [BD-P1200, in particular] at the time of manufacture and sale," and it also claims that the firm has "failed to provide a remedy consistent with the products' intended and represented uses." More specifically, the verbiage picks on the units' inability to play back select BD titles, and while some fixes have indeed been doled out, we still get the feeling many consumers have been left dissatisfied. Needless to say, this outcome should be interesting.

[Thank, Nfinity and Prey521]

We can't say that we're shocked to hear this -- you know, considering just how long those Xbox Live holiday blues went on -- but Microsoft is indeed being slapped with a class action lawsuit over the aforementioned outages. Reportedly, a trio of angered Texans are alleging that Microsoft didn't abide by its own contract when network issues disallowed a good chunk of Live users from getting their fix over the past few weeks. According to the complaint, MSFT understood that the time of year would lead to increased activity, yet "failed to provide adequate access and service to Xbox Live and its subscribers." Of course, we're betting the Redmond-based lawyers point out that clause about not guaranteeing any minimum level of service, but who knows, maybe we'll all end up with two shiny new Arcade titles.

[Thanks, Andre and Ben]

Sure, we've heard RIAA-admiring lawyers affirm that ripping your own CDs is in fact "stealing," but it seems the aforementioned entity is putting its money where its mouth is in a case against Jeffrey Howell. Reportedly, the Scottsdale, Arizona resident is being sued by the RIAA, and rather than Mr. Howell just writing a check and calling it a day, he's fighting back in court. Interestingly, it seems that the industry is maintaining that "it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into their computer." Ira Schwartz, the industry's lawyer in the case, is arguing that MP3 files created on his computer from legally purchased CDs are indeed "unauthorized copies," and while we've no idea what will become of all this, we suppose you should go on and wipe those personal copies before you too end up in handcuffs.

Update: We got some more info on the case -- it looks like Jeffrey's actually being sued for illegal downloading, not ripping, but this whole "ripping is illegal" tactic is still pretty distasteful. Check out this post for the full story.

[Via BlogRunner]

So, you've got an outstanding ticket from talking while behind the wheel in Chicago, do you? Meet attorney Blake Horwitz, who is now likely to be the best friend you don't even know. Reportedly, Mr. Horwitz is suing the city and claiming that arrests of citizens caught driving and talking were in fact illegal, and furthermore, he's demanding that Chicago "dismiss any outstanding tickets and refund almost $2 million in fines collected since 2005." Apparently, the actual law that prevents users from yapping and motoring requires that the city erect signs that instruct drivers not to converse while driving, yet such signs have purportedly not been posted across Chi-town. The devil's in the details, we suppose.

[Image courtesy of ImportTuner]

Apparently, DirecTV isn't looking to pay its lawyers any overtime over the holiday break, as it has been settling outstanding lawsuits recently like it's going out of style. Just over a week after it put aside its differences with Cox, the satellite provider has decided to make amends with Comcast over a suit filed in May. If you'll recall, DirecTV was quite flustered by Comcast's "survey," which allegedly found that two-thirds of respondents preferred Comcast's HD picture over that offered up by DISH Network / DirecTV. Notably, the actual terms of the deal weren't disclosed, but spokespeople from both outfits affirmed that they were satisfied with the outcome -- which, by the way, does allow Comcast to continue to cite the survey.

No, this isn't some horrific dream stuck on repeat. The legal quarrels between Nokia and Qualcomm are actually still ongoing, and while a US International Trade Commission judge has indeed issued an initial determination that favors Nokia, you can bet your bottom dollar that Qualcomm will be "petitioning the commission for a review." Nevertheless, judge Paul Luckern reportedly "found no infringement or violation by Nokia of the three asserted Qualcomm patents," which consequently led Nokia's CFO to proclaim that this was simply "another failed attempt by Qualcomm to mislead both Nokia and the telecommunications industry." Of course, we wouldn't recommend striking this battle off as complete -- after all, the determination now has to be forwarded on to the full commission for review, and it's not slated to dole out a final call until April.

[Via Yahoo / Reuters]

You don't have to look far outside of the Eastern District of Texas to find yourself a fresh patent infringement case, and sure enough, that's precisely where this one was filed. Getting dinged up today is none other than the Round Rock powerhouse and Motion Computing, both of which are being sued for so-called willful infringement on Typhoon Touch Technologies / Nova Mobility Systems touch panel patents. Apparently, the two defendants are being accused of profiting off of two particular patents without paying the plaintiffs their respective royalties, and the lawsuit is seeking to "enjoin Dell and Motion Computing from the continued violation of [the] patents" while also extracting a presumably hefty sum of cash. No specific products are blamed, but we're told that the patents cover technology used in tablet PCs, slate PCs, handheld PCs, UMPCs, PDAs and a host of other gear.

It's not like ThinkPads have been immune to the notorious overheating battery issue, but a fiery incident in Ohio may not be IBM's fault. In a somewhat bizarre tale, it's reported that an Ohioan purchased a replacement battery from Shentech for his ThinkPad, only to later have it overheat, catch on fire and damage his machine. After discovering that the faulty cell was actually a counterfeit, IBM took the liberty of ordering a dozen batteries from the Flushing, New York-based company, and it soon discovered that all twelve received were indeed fakes. As you can probably guess, IBM has filed suit against the outfit and has asked the court to require Shentech to hand over all of its batteries for destruction, profits it made from selling the fakes and a million dollars "per counterfeit mark per type of item sold." That'll teach 'em to mess with Big Blue.

[Via TGDaily]

Just months after a slew of OLPC XOs made their way into Nigeria, a Nigerian-owned company is filing suit against Nicholas Negroponte and the OLPC Association for patent infringement. Lagos Analysis and subsidiary LANCOR filed the lawsuit on November 22nd in Nigeria, claiming that the aforementioned parties willfully and illegally reverse engineered its keyboard driver source codes. Turns out, LANCOR makes its ends by selling region specific-based keyboards that allow for direct access inputting of "accents, symbols and diacritical marks during regular typing," and sure enough, the XO's board looks mighty similar to those offered up by the plaintiff. Additionally, the outfit is in the process of "filing a similar lawsuit against OLPC in a United States Federal Court," so we'd recommend snagging an XO or two before Nik Neg and company are forced to inflate prices to pay off those highfalutin lawyers.

[Image courtesy of Konyin and Digital Crusader]

Although we aren't inclined to believe that this is the first time such a suit has been brought upon Apple, a new one claiming that the Cupertino powerhouse has unlawfully tied the iPod to its iTunes Store has made its way to the US District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint was filed by a Florida resident on behalf of all Florida-based iPod owners and iTunes Store customers, and it basically alleges that certain limitations -- such as the inability to play content purchased through iTunes on anything not labeled an iPod -- is "unreasonable and illegal under Florida's antitrust and unfair trade laws." Furthermore, the plaintiff claims that Apple willfully disabled embedded support for rival formats, and stated that it was "in possession of monopoly power in the portable digital media player market, the online music market and the online video market." 'Course, it's not like those lawyers at 1 Infinite Loop aren't used to this stuff by now, and we really can't see this being the beginning of the end (nor a catalyst for rule changes) for the oh-so-mighty iTunes Store.

Just a fortnight after the AP called Comcast out for tampering with some users' ability to swap files over P2P networks, a coalition has formally asked the FCC to stop the operator from interfering with such activity. The petition reportedly asks the Commission to "immediately declare that Comcast is violating the FCC's policy," and it's being supported by the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Media Access Project and professors at the internet practices of the Yale, Harvard and Stanford law schools (among others). Separately, Free Press and Public Knowledge are filing a complaint that asks the FCC to demand a "forfeiture from Comcast of $195,000 per affected subscriber." It's also said that this will be the "first real test of the FCC's stance on Net Neutrality," but there's no telling how long the Commission will wait before acting on the filings.

We had a hunch that this spat between HP and Acer wouldn't just fade away into the sunset, and sure enough, HP is on the receiving end of the latest scuffle. Most recently, Acer has filed patent counterclaims against HP in the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin and with the US International Trade Commission, alleging that HP "infringed on patents related to personal computers, servers and peripheral devices." Unfortunately, that's about the extent of it, but Acer did go on to state that it would "take all necessary steps to protect and enforce its patented technologies." If the gloves weren't already off, we'd say they are now.

The world's favorite ATM is being hit up for even more coin today, as Vonage (presumably begrudgingly) agreed to resolve the patent lawsuit between it and Verizon. Reportedly, the actual amount that the VoIP provider will be forced to pay "depends on how the Court of Appeals decides Vonage's pending petition for rehearing regarding two of the Verizon patents." The breakdown is like so: if Vonage wins rehearing on either patent in question "or if the injunction is vacated," it'll owe $80 million. If the outfit doesn't win rehearing on either patent or "if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction," it will soon find its thinning wallet a full $117.5 million lighter. Sounds like a prototypical lose-lose situation (or win-win, depending on perspective).