infringement
Latest
Judge rules in favor of RIAA, XM ready for battle
Not like this is altogether surprising by any means, but a US District Judge has ruled that a lawsuit in which "record companies allege XM Radio is cheating them by letting consumers store songs can proceed toward trial." Deborah A. Batts has decided to not throw out the case which Atlantic, BMG Music, Capitol Records, and "other music distribution companies" filed against XM, and claims that the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 does "not protect the company in this instance." Essentially, the judge ruled that special handheld recording devices, marketed as XM+MP3 players (you know, like the Inno), are not at all like "radio-cassette players," and then proceeded to explain how "recording songs played over free radio doesn't threaten the market for copyrighted works as does the use of a recorder which stores songs from private radio broadcasts." Aside from our apparent inability to understand why source A is less illegal than source B, we're completely on the same page with Ms. Batts, but nevertheless, she also asserted that XM is attempting to be "both a broadcaster and a distributor, while only paying to be the former," but completely disregards the extra fees that satellite radio firms pay to record labels in comparison to "free" stations. But if you think XM is downtrodden, you'd be sorely mistaken, as the company simply stated that it "looked forward to making its case (read: winning) in court." Now that's the spirit.[Via Orbitcast]
Console makers sued over analog joysticks
Were you aware that every single major console maker operating right now is a dirty, criminal enterprise? It's true, if you believe a suit by Fenner Investments (PDF link) which claims that Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are all violating its patent for "a low-voltage joystick port interface," specifically one that converts an analog joystick input into machine-readable digital form. Never mind that the patent was filed in 1998, years after both Sony and Nintendo had introduced analog joysticks into their PlayStation and Nintendo 64 controllers (and filed patents for the same). Never mind that Microsoft had patented an interface for Windows-based analog controllers in 1997. Never mind that the idea of an analog joystick on a video game console goes at least as far back as the German VC4000 from 1978. None of this matters. Clearly all the major console manufacturers are willfully infringing on the long-held patents of this relatively unknown company. We predict a court decision for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to be awarded to Fenner any day now. We're holding our breath even as we write this. [Thanks pandlcg]
Alcatel sues Microsoft regarding online video patent
In yet another patent infringement case from Texas, French networking gear manufacturer Alcatel has just taken Microsoft to court for violating seven, count 'em, seven patents pertaining to fast-forward and rewind functions in online video streams. In a pair of suits filed in US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas this week, Alcatel is seeking damages for those alleged patent violations. As our buddies at PVR Wire point out, given that Alcatel worked with Microsoft to build an IPTV platform, it's likely that this will settle before this legal snowball gets too out of control -- that way, both parties could fast forward the outcome, too. Or would that be another violation?[Via PVR Wire]
Gemstar sues Moxi over guide
Gemstar-TV Guide has filed a federal patent infringement lawsuit against Diego's Moxi program guide, alleging that their TV listings are too similar to their own. Of course, Moxi has also filed an antitrust lawsuit against Gemstar. As usual, Gemstar wanted Moxi to license the program guide tech from them, and when Moxi refused, lawyers entered the picture, echoing TiVO v. Echostar on the lawsuit front. Because Charter is one of the major cable providers using Moxi technology, they are included in the lawsuit -- although surely not just to get some bigger bucks out of any potential settlement. We'll keep you updated on the lawsuit as we know more.
Pioneer suing Samsung over...well, you know the drill by now
We'd like to take a moment to extend a hearty congratulations to consumer electronics stalwart Pioneer upon its very first entry into the ugly world of patent litigation. The Japanese manufacturer is suing Korea's Samsung Electronics and Samsung SDI -- no stranger to IP lawsuits, as it's also embroiled in disputes with Panasonic and Fujitsu -- for infringement of proprietary technology related to the production of plasma displays. Specifically, Pioneer claims that Samsung is violating patents pertaining to electrode configuration boosting display quality and a manufacturing step that increases display brightness -- pretty serious stuff, we know. For its part, Samsung says that it's planning to file a counter-suit, although this one may be just for posturing, as the company has apparently been in talks with Pioneer since April of last year concerning possible licensing agreements. Reuters points out that this move is the latest in a trend of aggressive intellectual property protection on the part of Japanese firms regarding potential infringement by their Asian rivals, with Panasonic and LG having recently settled a similar PDP-based brouhaha. We'll keep you posted on this one as it slowly winds its way through the courts, but at the very least it seems that investors aren't too concerned with Samsung's culpability here: Pioneer shares gained 0.72% on the news, while Samsung stock actually rose even more, by a total of 2.77%.
With "pod" on lockdown, Apple goes after "podcast"
Now that Apple's lawyers have scared the pants off of small entrepreneurs selling products like the Profit Pod and TightPod -- items that have nothing to with portable audio in any way, mind you -- it seems that the next targets are companies that have the audacity to use the word "podcast" in their names. Wired's Listening Post blog is reporting that Steve's legal eagles have sent one of those scary cease and desist letters to a company called Podcast Ready, whose premier product, myPodder, gives users an automated way to download 'casts to their portable devices. CEO Russel Holliman claims that he'd consider changing the name of the program if necessary, but seems to be justifiably reticent about rebranding his entire business, considering the fact that "podcast" may not be "owned" by Apple nor even a derivative of "iPod" in the first place. Robert Scoble -- whose own company, PodTech, may be at risk in this witch hunt -- has weighed in on the issue by suggesting that the tech community as a whole adopt other terms like "audiocast" and "videocast" (or alternately, "audcast" and "vidcast") to describe this type of content, while other folks feel that fighting Apple and generating a ton of negative press for Cupertino is the best solution. Our take? Apple should be happy that its golden goose is getting so much free publicity, and if it isn't, we know of several companies that probably wouldn't mind if zencast, zunecast, or sansacast became the preferred terminology.Update: BBHub's own Russell Shaw delves into this issue a little further over at ZDnet, and finds that Apple is having trouble getting certain iPod-related phrases trademarked, including the word "iPodcasting."Read- Apple's nastygramRead- Scoble's take[Via calacanis.com]
Sony hit with another patent infringement suit
More legal woes for Sony: the computing and consumer electronics giant is being sued by Pennsylvania-based Agere Systems over a number of devices spanning several product categories that, you guessed it, may be infringing upon some eight different Agere patents. Specifically, Agere is claiming that the PSP, PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3 -- along with several Vaio, Handycam, Walkman, and Location Free TV models -- are in violation of patents covering such varied technologies as a "wireless local area network apparatus" and "barrier layer treatments for tungsten plugs," whatever those are. Furthermore, the integrated circuit component manufacturer believes that Sony "willfully" violated the patents, and is thus seeking damages that could end up being three times what non-willful infringements would warrant. For its part, Sony is putting up a multi-pronged defense: its lawyers are first trying to get a judge to invalidate all of the patents and make the whole mess go away quickly; but if they do turn out to be valid, Sony is claiming that it's in the clear anyway due to cross-licensing deals dating back to 1989 with AT&T and Lucent Technologies (from whom Agere was spun off) that cover seven of the eight patents in question. Our uninformed legal opinion? Without knowing all of the specifics, it's difficult to ascertain who's got the stronger case here, but we can say that Sony's recent track record in fighting infringement accusations hasn't exactly been spotless, so as much as we'd love to cover yet another ugly, drawn-out court battle, maybe a quick settlement is the way to go with this one.[Via PSP Fanboy]
Qualcomm announces ITC's probe of Nokia
Apparently, Qualcomm was serious when they asked Nokia to halt sales of GSM phones in the US a few weeks ago, triumphantly announcing that the US International Trade Commission (ITC) has now gotten in on the action. The ITC is looking into whether Nokia is in violation of the six patents Qualcomm claims them to be, presumably some of the same CDMA-related patents that have come up several times before -- patents that Nokia licenses for its CDMA handsets, but GSM and UMTS devices (which apparently tread on the same patent work) are not covered by the agreement. With Nokia potentially phasing out its CDMA business citing (in part) unfair licensing terms with Qualcomm, they don't exactly have the option of going the same route on the GSM front, so this battle looks set to play out to the bitter end. Meanwhile, we're going to start hoarding N93s in case things go south in a hurry.
Vonage sued again for patent infringement
Move over Verizon, 'cause Klausner Technologies wants a crack at the telecommunication whipping boy du jour, Vonage. In yet another claim of patent infringement, Klausner, a patent holding company with 25 VoIP voicemail patents to its name, is seeking $180 million in damages and royalties to compensate the suffering endured by their private investors. This, after failing to convince Vonage to sign a licensing deal back in January like they did with Time Warner in April for the technology behind AOL Voicemail. And just in case you're taking odds on who'll sue whom next, Vonage just announced that it had acquired three unrelated VoIP patents for the compression of packetized digital signals allowing them to go after, and collect licensing fees from competitors like Motorola, Time Warner, Qwest, Sprint, and you guessed it, Verizon. Oh what a tangled web we weave.
