infringement
Latest
Apple files patent lawsuit against Samsung in South Korea
Apple has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung in the manufacturer's home country of South Korea. This round of litigation is a response to an earlier patent infringement case Samsung filed against Apple in South Korea, Germany and Japan. It's also part of a longer volley of lawsuits that started when Apple sued Samsung for trademark and trade dress infringement over its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets. Despite their close manufacturing relationship, the two tech companies are embroiled in a complex legal battle both here in the United States and overseas. Last week, Apple's legal team claimed they were in talks with Samsung about these various cases, but Samsung denied this report. The companies have not reached any settlement agreement, and the patent infringement cases are slowly moving through the legal systems in their respective countries. Samsung was recently handed a blow in the US when a judge denied its request to see the iPad 3 and the iPhone 5.
Apple sues Samsung again for copying the iPhone's design, this time in South Korea
As if Apple and Samsung's patent infringement catfight weren't distracting enough, Apple is recreating the legal spectacle in Samsung's home country of South Korea. Apple just filed a suit against Samsung Electronics in Seoul Central District Court, with Cupertino alleging that the Samsung Galaxy S copies the third-generation iPhone, according to a report from the online news site, MoneyToday. That closely matches the claims Apple made when it it sued Samsung back in April for "slavishly" copying the iPhone and iPad. Since then, Apple's expanded its case to include additional Samsung devices, including the Droid Charge, Infuse 4G, Nexus S 4G, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy S II, and a handful of others. Meanwhile, Samsung has attempted (in vain) to subpoena prototypes of Apple's next-gen iPhone and iPad. We wouldn't be surprised if Samsung abandoned its efforts to peek Apple's forthcoming products, but if this is, indeed, destined to be a case of déjà vu, Samsung might well strike back with a suit of its own.
Lodsys requests 2 months to respond to Apple (Updated)
A few weeks ago, Apple filed a motion to intervene in Lodsys' controversial lawsuit against a handful of iOS app developers. Lodsys was required to respond to Apple's request by June 27, 2011, but the company has asked for a two month extension. If a judge approves this extension, Lodsys will have until August 27 to respond to Apple's intervention request. The patent holding company affirms this extension is not a stall tactic and claims Apple agrees to this delay. If true, this motion may be approved by the judge and developers may have to sweat it out another two months. Lodsys will also be free to broaden its lawsuit by sending out letters to additional developers. This legal maneuver could put developers in a difficult position. Apple may be stalled for the next two months, while Lodsys decides what to do. Of course, Apple and Google could use this time to work out an agreement with Lodsys. In the meantime, though, Lodsys could continue to breathe down the necks of the development community. Even the most steel-nerved developers may crack under this pressure and sign a licensing agreement just to get Lodsys out of the way. Update: Lodsys refiled its request and asked for an extension of one month which the judge is likely to grant. The initial two-month extension was done by mistake. [Via The Loop]
Samsung denied preview of iPad 3, iPhone 5 in ongoing Apple infringement suit
A US district judge this week handed Apple a victory in its ongoing legal battle with Samsung, denying the latter its reciprocal discovery request for a peek at prototypes of the upcoming versions of the iPhone and iPad. The request followed a similar one filed by Apple, in order to view Samsung products, including the Galaxy S II, Galaxy Tab 8.9, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Infuse 4G, and Droid Charge. Samsung, for its part, argued that taking an early look at the Apple's upcoming phone and tablet would be relevant to the legal ruling, seeing as how any changes made in those upcoming products would affect the trade dress ("total product image") of the line, and thereby potentially alter the possibility of consumer confusion, an important factor in determining infringement with certain unregistered trademarks with the product.The court denied Samsung's motion on a number of grounds. For one thing, Apple's initial complaint pertained to infringement of existing products, parameters deemed legit by the court. Also, the court took into account the fact that Apple tends to be far more tight-lipped about its product releases, whereas Samsung made a point of offering up information about forthcoming products into the public domain, including the release of 5,000 Galaxy Tab 10.1 units as samples to the public. That said, the judge was careful to note that Apple's suggestion that court protection of its trade secrets was insufficient "is not well taken." More details after the break.
Apple revises and expands its trademark infringement case against Samsung
Today is the day Apple and Samsung will meet with the judge in its patent infringement case to discuss Samsung's request to see the iPhone 5 and the iPad 3. Before this meeting, Apple revised its trademark claim and expanded it to include other Samsung hardware. The revision also adds stronger language to the complaint by substituting words like "misappropriated" with "copied" and providing additional details on how Apple's powerful brand and unique products have been hurt by Samsung's copycat mobile devices. The suit's main document now sits at an impressive 63 pages, up from the original 38. The meeting will take place today at 1:30 pm Pacific Time and we will keep you informed of any decisions that influence this case.
Dolby sues RIM over alleged patent infringement, seeks injunction in 7.1 surround
There's a new patent war brewing on both sides of the Atlantic, now that Dolby has filed a set of lawsuits against RIM. At issue is the audio compression technology RIM uses in its BlackBerry phones and PlayBook tablets. Dolby claims this intellectual property is protected under patents that several other smartphone makers have already licensed, and that RIM should be forced to do the same. The company's lawsuits, filed yesterday in both the US and Germany, seek financial damages and an injunction that would stop all sales of allegedly infringing products. RIM declined to comment on the suit, but we'll be sure to keep you posted as the battle unfolds. Head past the break for Dolby's press release.
Apple faces trademark infringement lawsuit over the use of iBooks
Apple is facing yet another trademark infringement lawsuit. This time the company must defend its use of the term iBooks. Apple is being sued by New York publisher John T. Colby who bought Byron Preiss Visual Productions and Ibooks, Inc during a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy proceeding back in 2006. These assets became available when founder Byron Preiss died unexpectedly in a car crash. Ibooks, Inc began selling books in September 1999 and sold over a thousand books under the Ibooks name. Colby claims Apple's use of the term will render his company's use of Ibooks and Ipicturebooks brand virtually worthless. He also points out that, though Apple owns the trademark for ibook and sold iBook computers, the Cupertino company never used the term in book sales until the iPad debuted in early 2010.
US DOJ greenlights Google's $900 million bid for Nortel patents; Apple, RIM also interested
It looks like Google will be able to bid on Nortel's patent portfolio after all, now that the Department of Justice has weighed in on the matter. According to the Wall Street Journal, El Goog's $900 million bid has passed a governmental antitrust review, just a few days ahead of next week's auction. Rivals like Microsoft, AT&T and Verizon had previously filed complaints with the DOJ, arguing that the sale of Nortel's 6,000 patents would give an unfair advantage to the auction's winner by providing it with a fresh arsenal for patent-infringement lawsuits. Google, however, claims it needs the portfolio to defend itself against legal challenges, since it has comparatively few patents to its name. The DOJ apparently sees nothing illegal with this argument, having determined that singular ownership of Nortel's intellectual property would pose no threat to market competition. This is obviously music to Google's ears, but the battle isn't over yet. Sources tell the Journal that both RIM and Apple are interested in filing their own bids for the patents, and have already begun discussing the matter with the Justice Department. None of the companies involved have commented on the story, but it'll all go down on June 20th, when the auction finally gets underway.
Apple: Samsung is harassing us with its iPhone 5 and iPad 3 request
Apple is not happy with Samsung's latest legal request to view prototype versions of the iPad 3 and the iPhone 5. The Cupertino company recently filed a response in which it called Samsung "the copyist" and claimed the Korean company is trying to harass it with these unreasonable demands. This latest volley is one of many between the two tech companies. Apple filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Samsung accusing the Korean company of copying its iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Samsung then countersued Apple with claims of patent infringement. Apple turned up the heat when it asked to review sample units of unreleased but publicly announced products such as the Galaxy Tab 10.1. Samsung responded in kind by requesting the iPad 3 and the iPhone 5. Got all that? Some of these issues will be decided this Friday when Samsung and Apple will meet with the judge presiding over the case to discuss Samsung's controversial iPhone 5 and iPad 3 request. These legal proceedings are taking place in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Apple sued for trademark infringement over iCloud name
iCloud Communications, LLC of Arizona is suing Apple for trademark infringement. The company claims Apple's use of the word iCloud is damaging to its business. According to the lawsuit, iCloud offers cloud computing products and services, telecommunication services, video conferencing and other internet services. The Arizona company is asking for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, monetary relief and attorney's fees. iCloud Communications is also asking for the destruction of all marketing materials bearing the iCloud name. The suit was filed in the US District Court of Arizona.
iCloud Communications sues Apple for obvious reasons
You probably know the drill by now -- Cupertino introduces a new product with a name that ostensibly belongs to someone else, and for better or worse that someone decides to take Apple to court. Today, it's iCloud Communications charging out of the left corner to sock Apple's iCloud square in the wallet. Arizona-based iCloud Communications appears to be a VoIP equipment and service provider, though in court documents it claims to be a cloud computing company as well, and says that it's been using the term iCloud (and the above logo) to sell such services since 2005. It's asking the court to destroy all of Apple's iCloud marketing materials, pay damages and even invalidate the iCloud trademark that Apple bought from Xcerion -- the only registered iCloud trademark so far -- but what's probably going to actually happen here is a nice little settlement out of court. We'll let you know if there's any reason to break out the popcorn. [Thanks, Tamaine M.]
X2Y Sues Apple, others over processor technology
Good thing Apple has a capable legal team as yet another patent infringement lawsuit has landed on the company's doorstep. Apple, HP and Intel are being sued by X2Y Attenuators, a Nevada-based company which owns patents covering the electrode arrangements of processors. The lawsuit reportedly targets Intel's Core i7 processor and includes both Apple and HP because they use the Core i7 in their notebook and desktop hardware. As with any patent lawsuit, we will have to wait to see how this all plays out in the courts.
Visualized: Samsung wants to see the iPhone 5 and iPad 3
Samsung lawyers recently asked the court to make Apple show them the as-yet-unannounced iPhone 5 and iPad 3, claiming that they need to know what Apple's products will look like ahead of time to avoid future lawsuits and uncanny similarities.If only it were this easy.
Apple accused of violating patented Wi-Fi antenna designs
The latest in a seemingly endless stream of patent lawsuits against Apple and other computer manufacturers has been filed in the US District Court for the District of Delaware. This time, the plaintiff is a company named Linex Technologies, which has filed suit against Apple, HP and several other companies that manufacture Wi-Fi products. Linex also filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission, asking for a ban on imports of products which it believes infringe on patents held by the company. Linex holds patents dealing with many wireless technologies and licenses those patents to manufacturers. The complaint targets Apple for allegedly violating a pair of patents related to the design and construction of Wi-Fi antennas. Not all Apple products are included in the lawsuit, but every MacBook model, the AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule are cited as infringing on patents held by Linex technologies. The plaintiff is asking the court to cease the sale of these products, as well as seeking damages for violation of the patents. This should be a fascinating lawsuit to watch as it unfolds. Apple and HP (which Linex alleges is violating the patents with Wi-Fi antennas in many PCs, servers, and the MediaSmart LCD HDTV) will be fighting this lawsuit with all their might as it affects many of their key product lines.
Mario clone in App Store, place your bets for how long (Update: It's gone)
UPDATE: Yeah, as tipster Matt told us, this app has been pulled. That only took a few hours. You gotta be kidding. I am dying to know who, exactly, at Apple is unfamiliar with Mario the plumber. An intern born in the 90s, maybe? At any rate, go grab this platformer featuring Monino, whose brother was captured by Bowler and is being kept in a castle. Sound familiar? It's like a mirror universe, I know. Given how much the iPod touch and iPhone have been hurting Nintendo's DS sales, we're likely going to have to wait until the Japanese game company stops making hardware altogether to see a real Mario franchise appear on iOS. Until then (and until someone at Cupertino wakes up to an irritated email), you'll have this game. Honestly I'm not wasting the 99-cents on it, as the reviews clearly point out the controls are atrocious. You can't have a decent platformer if the controls aren't responsive, I don't care how gussied up to look like a Nintendo rip-off it may be. Get it while it still exists, which will probably be a few more hours. They didn't even bother to change Mario's appearance! Update: Electricpig posted a video as well, which you can see on the next page. Thanks for the tip, David!
Google ordered to pay $5 million in Linux patent infringement suit (updated)
An East Texas jury recently awarded a relatively small computer firm patent troll a pretty hefty settlement (in you and me dollars) in a patent infringement suit that named Google, Yahoo, Amazon, AOL, and Myspace as defendants. The jury awarded Bedrock Computer Technologies LLC $5 million for a patent concerning the Linux kernel found in the software behind Google's servers. The patent in question is described as a "method and apparatus for information storage and retrieval using a hashing technique with external chaining and on-the-fly removal of expired data." It appears Google is the first of the defendants to face a judgement, but we have a feeling this decision might have set a precedent. Of course, no infringement suit would be complete without a healthy helping of appeals -- and considering the decision came from a district court, we can almost guarantee this case is no exception. You didn't expect the big guys to stay down for the count, did you? Update: As it turns out, the plaintiff in question here, Bedrock Computer Technologies, is actually owned by David Garrod, a lawyer and patent reform activist. Ars Technica profiled Garrod following the initial suit, pointing to the clear contradiction between his trolling and reform efforts. What's more, Bedrock sued Google and the rest of the defendants in June 2009. Just six months later, Bedrock was back in the courtroom, but this time it was on the receiving end. Red Hat, the company supplying the OS behind Google's search engine services, was suing Bedrock for patent invalidity.
Apple sues Samsung: here's the deal
So we all know that Apple's suing Samsung alleging myriad IP infringements, but you may not know what all the fuss is about. On one hand, the lawsuit is surprising because Apple gets much of the goodies it needs to build its iconic iPhones, iPads, and Macs from Sammy, and common sense dictates that you don't bite the hand that feeds you. On the other hand, however, folks in Cupertino don't take too kindly to copycats, and while it's hard to put a dollar value on the brand equity Apple currently enjoys, this lawsuit shows it's valuable enough for Apple to risk upsetting its relationship with Samsung and jeopardizing its supply chain. Having given the court docs a good read, here's our rundown of what's going on. According to Apple's complaint, phones from Samsung (particularly the Galaxy S variety) and its Galaxy Tab are eroding the efficacy of Apple's carefully crafted brand. That brand is built, in no small part, upon the trade dress (aka the appearance and packaging) of its iDevices and its trademarked iOS icons, and Apple has spent over two billion dollars on advertising from 2007-2010 to stake out a little space in everyone's brain that associates the iPhone's looks and its progeny's derivative forms with Apple. It's worked quite well too, as Apple revealed (for the first time) in its complaint that it has sold over 60 million iPod touches, 108 million iPhones, and 19 million iPads total. Problem is, Apple views the Galaxy devices, their TouchWiz UI, and packaging -- with their Apple-esque appearance -- as illegal infringers on its hard-earned mental real estate, and it's suing Sammy to stop the squatting and pay for its IP trespassing ways. Of course, Apple isn't just dragging Samsung to court for cashing in on the iPhone image in our hearts and minds -- Jobs and company have accused Sammy of infringing several of their patents, too. Apple asserts that TouchWiz and the Galaxy S infringe upon its iOS home screen and iPhone 3G design patents. Additionally, the complaint says Samsung has run afoul of several Apple utility patents for: the iOS instant messaging interface, the "bounce back" effect you get upon scrolling too far in a list or window, control and status widgets, UI status windows that disappear a set time after being opened, and scrolling and ellipse multi-touch gesture recognition. In light of these alleged mass IP infringements, Apple's asking the court for preliminary and permanent injunctions to take Samsung's Galaxy devices off the market, in addition to the usual request for punitives, triple damages and lost profits. We've already heard that Samsung will "respond strongly" to Apple's show of legal force, but time will tell if Sammy's strong response comes in, or out of court. Those looking for a full breakdown of Apple's legal claims can hit the more coverage link below.
Nokia keeps the lawyers well fed, returns to the ITC with fresh complaints about Apple
Like a desperate suitor unable to take "no" for an answer, Nokia's come back to the ITC with fresh allegations about Apple using its patented technologies without proper authorization. On Friday, the International Trade Commission made an initial determination that Apple wasn't actually making use of five patents held by the Finnish company -- a ruling that has yet to be ratified by the Commission itself, notably -- which Nokia predictably "does not agree" with and is now countering with the addition of seven more patents it believes have been infringed. Those relate to multitasking, data synchronization, positioning, call quality, and Bluetooth accessories, and affect "virtually all products" in Cupertino's portfolio. Rather boastfully, Nokia informs us that a total of 46 of its patents are now being actioned in some sort of lawsuit against Apple, whether you're talking about the ITC, US, Dutch, German, or British courts. As the old saying goes, if you can't beat 'em, send in the lawyers. See Nokia's press release about this latest legal activity after the break.
Kodak and Apple win early victories at International Trade Commission, big bucks hang in the balance
Looks like the US International Trade Commission's had a busy week in tech, as Bloomberg reports the organization has ruled on two longstanding patent wars involving Apple, Nokia, RIM and Kodak. While neither is out of the woods quite yet, two companies have reason to be pleased: Apple and Kodak. ITC Judge E. James Gildea ruled that five Nokia patents don't apply to Apple products, making a ban on iDevice importation unlikely in the United States, and the commission has also agreed to reconsider Kodak's case against Apple and RIM (regarding camera image previews) with its full six members present. Since nobody likes having their products seized at customs, even such preliminary verdicts can lead to large cash sums being paid out, and Kodak thinks it's found a whopper here -- Bloomberg reports that Kodak received a total of $964 million in licensing fees from Samsung and LG, and the company thinks it can suck $1 billion out of its latest pair of defendants. We'll let you know how it goes down.
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.
