AppleLegal
Latest
What could happen if Apple, DoJ go to trial over e-books
As of last Friday, Apple is the last remaining defendant in the US Department of Justice e-book antitrust case. On Friday, Macmillan settled with the government, the last of the original five publishers named in the case to do so. Now Apple is standing alone against the DoJ and is expected to end up in court on June 3, 2013. So, what are the possible ramifications if Apple doesn't settle prior to that court date? According to a Reuters story published today, the case alleges that Apple conspired with the five publishers to keep e-book prices in the iBookstore and other retailers higher than those available from Amazon.com. If the case goes to trial, US District Judge Denise Cote will seek a judicial decree stating that Apple violated antitrust law. If Apple loses, a number of plaintiffs could use the judgment as evidence against Apple in separate actions seeking monetary damages. Those plaintiffs could seek compensation for higher prices paid for e-books plus damages. Antitrust laws allow plaintiffs to recover triple the actual damages, and in 2012 alone, those damages were estimated to be at more than $200 million. If Apple went to trial and lost, the company could lose big. But the company may want to go to trial to establish an antitrust principle that could help it forge future deals with entertainment companies. Apple could still choose to settle with the DoJ, but at this time it is showing no signs that it plans to do so.
ITC to rule on Apple's Samsung complaint August 1
Administrative Law Judge Thomas B. Pender of the International Trade Commission (ITC) has scheduled a final ruling on one of Apple's lawsuits against Samsung for August 1, 2013. The ruling in question deals with a decision made by Pender in October of 2012 finding Samsung to be in violation of a design patent and three utility patents owned by Apple. Pender had recommended that the ITC force a ban on certain Samsung products that were infringing on Apple patents, but the ITC returned two of those patents -- dealing with providing translucent images on a display and headphone plug detection circuitry -- back to Pender for him to reconsider. Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents commented that even if Pender rules in Apple's favor, it's not certain whether or not that will result in a ban on infringing Galaxy products in the US. Samsung has designed workarounds to bypass several of the violations, although Pender will have the final word on whether or not those workarounds are sufficient to keep a ban at bay. [via AppleInsider]
Dutch court says Samsung Galaxy tablets don't copy iPad
Apple hasn't had a lot of success in proving that Samsung's products infringe on its designs, in Europe at least. Last year Apple lost a suit in the United Kingdom accusing Samsung's Galaxy Tab of infringing on its popular iPad design. As a result, the UK judge ruled that Apple had to advertise that Samsung did not copy Apple on its homepage at Apple.com/uk. Now comes news that Apple has lost another case where it alleged Samsung's Galaxy tablet infringed on the iPad's design, this time in the Netherlands, according to AllThingsD: "On Wednesday, a district court in the Hague ruled that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy Tab 8.9 and Galaxy Tab 7.7 don't infringe Apple's registered design for the iPad. While the devices might share a similar rectangular shape with rounded corners, the overall impression they present is different, the court said." Apple has had more luck in the US where it won a $1 billion compensation verdict from Samsung in August.
Samsung loses bid to seal sales data in Apple battle
Samsung has lost a bid to seal its sales data for several of its products, according to Bloomberg. Judge Lucy Koh ruled against Samsung's objection to her December 10 order that the company list the total number of certain products sold over the last several months. Which products and the exact timeframe is not known. After the US$1.05 billion judgment against Samsung last year, it was apparent that Apple was the big financial winner in the court case that has stretched on for years now. However, Apple -- and now Samsung -- has had to publish confidential sales and inventory numbers, along with other information like prototype designs and more. As the battle between the two mobile juggernauts continues, it is becoming apparent that, with all the valuable sales and R&D information the two companies have had to disclose, the indirect big winners could be their other competition.
Apple adds 6 Samsung products to second US patent lawsuit
Late last week, Apple filed a motion to expand its California infringement lawsuit against Samsung to include the handset maker's latest mobile devices. According to FOSS Patents, Apple added the Galaxy Note II, the Galaxy S III, the Galaxy Tab 8.9 WiFi, the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, the Rugby Pro and the Galaxy S III Mini to its claim. Samsung, last week, also expanded its infringement claims in the same case to include the iPad 4 and the iPad mini. This is the second Apple v. Samsung lawsuit making its way through the California court system and was filed in early 2012. The first lawsuit ended with a guilty verdict against Samsung.
Apple bought "Lightning" trademark from Harley-Davidson
Patently Apple reports that Apple acquired the trademark for "Lightning" from Harley-Davidson. Harley's original holding covered items you'd expect, like motorcycle parts, electrical parts, a protective helmet and turn signal parts. Interestingly, it also covered "computer game programs, eye glasses and eyeglass frames." As we all know, large companies like Apple and Harley-Davidson often acquire patents and trademarks for ideas of products that will never see production. Still, it can be interesting to dive into the history of different filings.
Apple banning games with "memory" in the name from App Store
Game maker Ravensburger is reportedly putting pressure on Apple regarding iOS games with "Memory" in the title. The German game and puzzle manufacturer claims to hold a trademark on the term in over 40 countries. Ravensburger makes a popular line of games called "Memory" with international recognition. In fact, the group claims that 91 percent of Germans are familiar with Memory, the game. Apple has not issued a comment, though Gamasutra claims that iOS developers whose games include the term "memory" and are internationally distributed have received notice to make a name change. If you're on that list, let us know in the comments. [Via The Register]
Did Apple pay more than $20 million for Swiss clock design?
Apple's iPad has a gorgeous Swiss-inspired clock that may have cost the company millions. According to a report in the Swiss newspaper Tages-Anzeiger, Apple paid the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB) 20 million Swiss francs (US$21 million) for the rights to use the iconic clock face in iOS 6. The brouhaha over the clock emerged in September when the SBB criticized Apple for using the railway clock, which was designed by Hans Hilfiker for the SBB and has become a symbol of Swiss innovation and reliability. The SBB met with Apple, which signed a licensing deal to use the clock face. Details of the agreement were not disclosed, and the SBB has refused to comment on this latest report. [Via AllThingsD]
Daily Update for November 2, 2012
It's the TUAW Daily Update, your source for Apple news in a convenient audio format. You'll get all the top Apple stories of the day in three to five minutes for a quick review of what's happening in the Apple world. You can listen to today's Apple stories by clicking the inline player (requires Flash) or the non-Flash link below. To subscribe to the podcast for daily listening through iTunes, click here. No Flash? Click here to listen. Subscribe via RSS
Phil Schiller to provide further testimony to Samsung Electronics
Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing, will take the stand again in the ongoing legal battle between his company and Samsung. The US District Court for the Northern District of California has ordered both Samsung and Apple to make a number of executives available for "not more than three hours." Schiller was among those requested of Apple. He is expected to appear "no later than November 5, 2012." I can picture him on the witness stand now: "Good morning. I've got some exciting things to share with you today..."
Apple's re-written Samsung statement has been published
Apple has re-written a court-ordered apology to Samsung for accusing the company of copying certain aspects of the iPad. A UK court ordered the statement to be written back in July. Apple complied earlier this week, publishing a brief note on its website, but Robin Jacob, the judge in the case, did not like the tone or content of the statement and gave Apple 24 hours to re-write it. That revision hit UK newspapers today. It's considerably shorter and much less snarky, but still not the most gushing apology we've ever read: "On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, namely the Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe on Apple's Community registered design No. 0000181607-0001...There is no injunction in respect of the Community registered design in force anywhere in Europe." I get the warm fuzzies just reading that. We'll see if Judge Jacob finds it satisfactory.
Court orders Apple to rewrite 'untrue' notice about Samsung Galaxy Tab design
UK magistrate Judge Robin Jacob is not amused with the court-ordered statement Apple published, following the Samsung Galaxy Tab design ruling. Calling the statement "a plain breach of the order" and "incorrect," Jacob has given Apple 24 hours to replace the statement, according to Bloomberg. Apple's statement acknowledged that the "High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design," but went on to say, "So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad."
Apple's 'blasphemous' logo under fire in Russia
And now for your daily dose of overreaction. Extreme Orthodox Christians in Russia have upped their complaints about Apple's iconic logo, according to CNet. This specific group of Orthodox Christians say that Apple's logo represents a "blasphemous" attack on the church since it can be seen as a representation of the Christian mythology of Satan tempting Eve in the Garden of Eden. As CNet points out, the uproar correlates to other religious/political issues happening in Russia right now -- namely the jailing of punk band Pussy Riot for its protest against the Russian Orthodox Church and its (and other secularist's) assertions that the Church has the goal of creating a clerical police state. This isn't the first time Apple's logo has been associated with Satan, and there's plenty of other crazy examples out there (jump to the 2:40 mark in this video) but this is something that Apple should conceivably be worried about. Anti-blasphemy laws are currently being proposed in Russia which, should they pass, could theoretically bar Apple from selling products with its logo on them in the country.
Japanese court: Apple did not infringe on two Samsung patents
Samsung and Apple are waging a legal battle in courts all over the world. Though the decisions in the US, UK and Germany garner most of the attention, other cases in other jurisdictions are also making their ways through their court systems. In Japan, two rulings favorable to Apple were handed down in September and October, according to a report from the Asahi Shimbun. In these cases, the Tokyo court said Apple's Japanese unit did not infringe Samsung's patents and denied the Korean manufacturer's request to ban the iPhone in Japan. The two patents in the Japanese cases cover the downloading of an app to a smartphone and the use of airplane mode to turn off a phone's cellular and wireless radios when flying. [Via AppleInsider and FOSS Patents]
Apple's struggle to keep secret documents sealed
After winning big against Samsung in a US court, Apple is now on the defensive, battling against the same court to keep its financial information secret, says a report in Ars Technica. On Tuesday, the company faced a setback in this battle when US Judge Lucy Koh refused to seal documents that contained sensitive financial information. These documents detail "unit sales, revenue, profit, profit margin and cost data" on a product-by-product basis. Though Apple does report sales by device type in its quarterly earnings, it does not break down the sales by model, nor does it reveal its device profit margins, revenue and other similar device-specific information. This financial information is required by the court to justify the billions in monetary damages that Apple is seeking. Apple claims this data should be protected as a trade secret, but Judge Koh, the media and other groups disagree. Koh argued in her denial of Apple's request that Apple "cannot both use its financial data to seek multi-billion dollar damages and insist on keeping it secret." Koh did agree to keep the documents sealed until Apple's request is heard by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Photographer Sabine Liewald sues Apple over copyright infringement
No stranger to copyright litigation, Apple will play the defensive role in a suit by photographer Sabine Liewald who alleges the company used a piece of her work without permission. According to details obtained by Patently Apple, the company contacted Liewald's agency, Factory Downtown, and requested a high-resolution version of a photograph titled Eye Closeup strictly for internal layout purposes. The photograph subsequently popped up on marketing materials for Apple's Retina-equipped MacBook Pro -- as seen above in the court document obtained by Patently Apple -- as well as in the keynote address revealing the new notebook. As you can imagine, this didn't sit well with the Swiss photographer, and she is now seeking to collect an unspecified figure for damages relating to the unlawful use of the image.
Apple agrees to licensing terms over Swiss clock design
The Swiss Federal Railways (SBB) and Apple have reached a licensing agreement that'll let Apple use the SBB's iconic clock design in iOS 6. Last month, the Swiss national railway criticized Apple for copying the look of the classic clock face without permission in the clock app on the iPad. Engineer and designer Hans Hilfiker designed the railway station clock in 1944. It has since become an icon for Swiss innovation and reliability, and its design is present in train stations throughout Europe. Rather than ban Apple from using the clock, the SBB decided to seek "an amicable agreement and compensation" with the Cupertino company. Details on the amount of money Apple had to pay to continue using the design were not revealed. [Via The Verge]
Ameranth claims Apple's Passbook violates reservation patents
In the latest in patent infringing suits against Apple, iOS 6's Passbook is the target. Apple Insider reports that Ameranth, which produces poker and restaurant software, claims that the ability to store movie and airline tickets and hotel reservations in Passbook infringes on patents that the company has filed between 1999 and 2005. GigaOM points out that Ameranth has filed similar suits against other companies this summer, and VentureBeat adds that Microsoft and Motorola hold a stake in the company. Ameranth has a history of mostly focusing on enforcing its patents, but with actual products and that financial stake under its belt, they might be a bit more than an ordinary patent troll.
Apple facing European investigation of Apple Care sales
European Union Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding is asking EU countries to confirm that Apple retailers are advertising the buyers' right to a minimum two-year warranty for qualifying products. Reding notes that "Apple prominently advertised that its products come with a one-year manufacturer warranty but failed to clearly indicate the consumers' automatic and free-of-cost entitlement to a minimum two-year guarantee under EU law" in a letter to EU members. You'll remember that Apple was recently fined heavily by the Italian Antitrust Authority for a similar issue. Specifically, Apple was found to have pushed its own Apple Care warranty while failing to inform customers of the two-year Consumer Code that's free and readily available to all. Apple was told to alter sales packages of the Apple Protection Plan to include information on the free service that's available to customers after two years. Apple did not offer comment to Bloomberg, which published the story.
Apple files patent application for 'intelligent automated assistant'
Engadget caught wind of the fact that Apple has filed a patent for an "intelligent automated assistant," which sounds like the nice lady (or man) in your iPhone (or, as of iOS 6, iPad 3) called Siri. The application talks at length about a digital assistant controlled using speech (it's Siri), which takes a user's speech input (again, it's Siri) and then fulfills the speaker's request using digitized speech. In other words, a patent for Siri. Unfortunately, because the patent is so general, there isn't a whole lot of nuts-and-bolts talk about how Siri actually works -- at least none that we didn't know already. But there is some reference to the term "anchor phrases," which are words and phrases that Siri looks for in your speech to actually figure out what you're saying. The patent also talks about providing alternate words to the user in case something can't be understood, and the use of databases (like, say, Wolfram Alpha) for figuring out which information is needed by the user. Apple's all covered, then, should it ever face the question of Siri's origin in court. This patent, plus any others that it may have picked up when Siri was acquired, should be more than enough to defend its case.
