injunction
Latest
Court backs Apple's request to halt sales of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh granted Apple an injunction that'll ban the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US, according to Reuters. Koh previously denied Apple's injunction request, but a federal appeals court asked her to reconsider her decision on the Samsung tablet. In a decision handed down late on Tuesday, Koh writes, Although Samsung has a right to compete, it does not have a right to compete unfairly, by flooding the market with infringing products. While Samsung will certainly suffer lost sales from the issuance of an injunction, the hardship to Apple of having to compete directly with Samsung's infringing products outweighs Samsung's harm in light of the previous findings by the Court. The ban will go into effect when Apple posts a US$2.6 million bond. This money will be used to compensate Samsung for lost revenue if a later ruling finds that the injunction decision was wrong. Samsung is expected to appeal this ruling in a Washington D.C. federal appeals court.
Judge Koh stops US sales of Galaxy Tab 10.1, puts a smack down on Samsung (updated)
Thought Samsung was out of the woods when it defeated Apple's attempt to prevent it from selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 stateside? Well, Apple appealed that decision and was given a second crack at banning Sammy's slate last month -- and it looks like Cupertino made the most of the opportunity, as Reuters reports that Judge Koh has granted Cupertino's request to enjoin the sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1. Details are scarce at the moment, but we do know it's only a preliminary injunction, meaning if Samsung's ultimately victorious in the case, the injunction will lift and it'll be free to peddle its wares once again. Still, it's certainly bad news for the Korean company, but given its expansive stable of other slates still on sale combined with its recent economic performance, we're sure Samsung can weather the storm while the courtroom fireworks continue. Update 1: All Things D got a copy of Koh's order, and we just gave it a quick read. Turns out that she granted the injunction due to the strength of the merits of Apple's case and the unlikelihood that Samsung would invalidate Apple's design patent -- the court already held that the 10.1 is "virtually indistinguishable" from the iPad's design and likely infringes Apple's IP. Furthermore, Judge Koh held that, because Apple and Samsung are direct competitors in the tablet space and "design mattered more to customers in making tablet purchases," Apple would be irreparably harmed by further 10.1 sales. Those two factors outweighed any hardship suffered by Samsung, and thus, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was stricken from US shelves. Update 2: Well, that didn't take long -- a mere five hours after Judge Koh's order, Samsung filed an appeal, according to Foss Patents.
Apple denied Galaxy S III injunction in the US
US District Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's request for an injunction that would ban the sales of the new Samsung Galaxy S III, according to a report by Reuters. Koh said Apple's request to block the June 21 launch of the Android handset would "overload her calendar." Instead of pausing to consider the injunction, Koh would rather focus on the larger trial between Samsung and Apple, which is slated to pick up again in July.
Apple must wait for sales injunction against Galaxy Tab 10.1
Apple pushed for an injunction that would ban the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US, but Judge Lucy Koh of the United States District for the Northern District of California denied this motion. According to a report by FOSS Patents, Koh told Apple it had to wait until the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issues its mandate on the case. Once the CAFC responds, Apple can ask again for an injunction. This delay will help Samsung, which faces Apple in another court session scheduled for Thursday June 7. Rather than the Galaxy Tab injunction, the session will focus on the injunction Apple filed against the Galaxy Nexus.
Apple files (again) for a preliminary ban against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
If you found yourself longing for the minor tweaks Samsung made to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany earlier this year, you may be in luck: Apple's filed for a preliminary injunction against the slate stateside. It isn't the first one, either, Cupertino filed something similar back in February, though it didn't quite pass legal muster. After gaining some headway earlier this week, Cook's crew is in for round two, according to FOSS Patents, asking for Judge Koh to rule in their favor without a new hearing. Concerned consumers, however, can sidestep the whole mess by simply opting for an injunction-exempt Galaxy Tab 2. Details and speculation can be found at the source link below, just in case you aren't already sick to death of the whole Samsung / Apple spat.
Apple gets another bite, wins appeal to pursue preliminary injunction against Samsung
We'll forgive you if you've forgotten, given the myriad Apple/Samsung legal shenanigans, but back in February, Apple attempted to obtain a preliminary injunction against Samsung to prevent the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a few phones from being sold in the US. Samsung emerged victorious, as the district court denied Cupertino's request because it questioned the validity of a couple of Apple's patents and didn't see how Apple would be irreparably harmed if it failed to get Sammy's products banned. Naturally, Tim Cook's crew appealed that decision, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has decided to give Apple another crack at obtaining an injunction. The CAFC upheld the lower court's ruling as to three of the four patents, but found fault with the District Court's holding that Apple's tablet design patent had substantial questions of validity. Essentially, the lower court held that Apple's patent was likely no good because it was an obvious design in light of two tablets that were created long before Apple patented the iPad's look. However, the CAFC found that one of the previous slate's asymmetrical bezel and lack of an unbroken, all-glass surface (among other differences) were sufficient to render Apple's patent non-obvious. Basically, the appellate court found that the District court "construed the claimed design too broadly," and remanded the issue so that the district court could complete its preliminary injunction analysis. So, Apple's cleared a big hurdle towards getting the Galaxy Tab 10.1 off the US market, but the company's still got to persuade Judge Koh that it'll be irreparably harmed without the injunction. This decision assures even longer legal proceedings, but given how well both of these tech titans are doing these days, we're pretty sure they can afford the attorneys' fees.
Motorola granted injunction against Xbox 360 sales in Germany, not as dramatic as it sounds
A German court has granted Motorola Mobility an injunction against the sale and/or distribution of the Xbox 360 in Germany, as well as copies of Windows 7, Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player, following a ruling that some of Microsoft's products violate patents that pertain to the H.264 video codec and are held by Motorola.Were Motorola to enforce this injunction, it would mean that Microsoft would lose the ability to sell its flagship products in Deutschland until the matter of Motorola's patents is settled, which would be a Very Big Deal™. Thing is, though, Motorola is currently prohibited from enforcing the injunction due to a restraining order issued by an American judge in Seattle.Microsoft argued that Motorola is abusing its "Frand-commitments," which are essentially a pinky swear that a massive company makes to the world when it is in possession of a universally required piece of technology, wherein it commits to providing licenses for said technology at "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" rates. Microsoft says that Motorola's asking price goes beyond fair and reasonable, so the judge issued the restraining order to prevent the injunction from happening until the case can be heard, which is currently scheduled to happen on May 7.Meanwhile, Microsoft is also appealing the German court's decision, and thanks to the restraining order from the American judge, it'll be able to conduct business as usual during that process. Patent infringement cases like this are all about applying pressure on both sides until one of the companies involved cracks, so we doubt that Motorola ever actually expected that it'd be able to enforce a successful injunction. The fact that it happened at all, however, despite being nullified, adds another layer of trouble and stress to Microsoft's half of the situation.It's a lot like vs. Dr. Mario, but with slightly more money involved.
German court grants Motorola injunction against Windows 7 and Xbox 360 (updated: Microsoft comments)
Microsoft and Motorola continue to duke it out in courts across the world, and it looks like the Google-owned manufacturer has just chalked up a victory in Europe. Based on a pair of patents involved the H.264 video codec, the Mannheim regional court ruled on four lawsuits between the two companies, granting an injunction against the continued distribution of Windows 7, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and the Xbox 360 in Germany. Microsoft has already upped sticks from the country to reduce the effect of its current legal predicament. FOSS Patents reports that Motorola won't be able to immediately enforce the ruling. The company is still being investigated by the EU over possible antitrust violations related to licensing its patents -- something that could further complicate today's ruling. Update: Microsoft's just got in touch to comment on the recent ruling -- it doesn't look like it's over just yet: "This is one step in a long process, and we are confident that Motorola will eventually be held to its promise to make its standard essential patents available on fair and reasonable terms for the benefit of consumers who enjoy video on the web. Motorola is prohibited from acting on today's decision, and our business in Germany will continue as usual while we appeal this decision and pursue the fundamental issue of Motorola's broken promise. "
German court upholds ban on iCloud and MobileMe push emails
It's been well over a month now since Apple suspended push email from its iCloud and MobileMe services, and it doesn't look like it will be switching them back on any time soon. According to the Wall Street Journal, a German regional court has backed the ban, upholding Motorola Mobility's claims of patent infringements. The court agreed that Apple must also pay damages to Motorola, but has yet to agree on an amount. So, for now, users will need to stick to manually fetching updates, and hope a final agreement can be met further down the line.
EU launches antitrust probes against Motorola after complaints from Apple, Microsoft
Apple and Microsoft filed separate complaints with the EU that accuse Motorola of using its essential, standards-based patents as weapons to curb competitor's products and advance their own, says a report in The New York Times. Under EU law, companies with patents essential to an industry standard like 3G must license these patents under fair and reasonable terms. The EU has opened two investigations that'll examine whether Motorola failed to license its patents and is using them to win injunctions against the Xbox, the iPhone and the iPad instead. If it is found guilty, Motorola or its soon-to-be-parent company Google could be fined up to ten percent of its worldwide annual income.
Kaleidescape DVD servers granted a temporary stay
Things have been looking bleak for Kaleidescape's DVD servers since a Judge ruled against them on appeal, and earlier this month issued an injunction that was to have taken effect on April 8th. We say was because CEO Michael Malcolm is now saying the California 6th District Court of Appeal has issued a temporary stay of that injunction. The court is still deciding whether or not to stay the injunction during the entire process, a decision Malcolm says could affect whether or not the company survives or has to lay people off. While the current case does not affect Kaleidescape's tethered Blu-ray servers, it's tiring to hear about all this from the DVD CCA over a DRM scheme that was cracked wide open so long ago, and a case that had appeared to be over.
US Judge rejects Hasbro / ASUS sales ban, Transformer Prime prevails
Coming up with original gadget names is tough work, and, after all, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery -- right? So it was no surprise when ASUS happened upon an alias that more than slightly resembled that of a popular fictional mutant semi -- you know, Transformer Optimus Prime. However shockingly, Hasbro wasn't a fan, opting to battle ASUS to the death in the U.S. court system. And, after countless weeks and many bank holidays, we finally have a victor. It appears that the leader of the Autobots will continue to share its name with the Taiwanese company's tablet -- that's what you get for leaving the fate of the world to mere human bureaucrats. Just don't be surprised when it comes time to name the world's next Superhero, Ms. Zenbook UX31.
Japanese court orders Google to halt Instant search for suggesting one man be fired
Could Google Instant suggest you out of a job? According to one Japanese man's claims, that search algorithm is precisely what landed him a pink slip and permanent spot on the unemployment line. The Kyodo News Agency is reporting that a string of unflattering searches performed by the plaintiff's former employer allegedly linked him to a host of illegal and unflattering behavior, leading to his eventual termination. Baseless claims of a paranoiac? One Tokyo court doesn't think so, as the search giant's been issued an injunction that temporarily bars the use of autocomplete in the country. So far, Mountain View's refused to bow down to the order and maintains its service is consistent with user privacy policies. Our currently jobless John Doe-san would beg to differ and had previously sought the company's assistance in deleting the offending queries before seeking judicial aide, albeit to no avail. Should be interesting to see how this case plays out, seeing as the infraction is the first of its kind and could potentially alter the legal parameters of internet queries. We'll keep you posted on further developments as this courtroom drama continues to play out.
Apple wins German photo gallery lawsuit against Motorola
Apple won a significant legal victory when a German court ruled that Motorola Mobility violates patent EP2059868, says a report at FOSS Patents. The patent details a "portable electronic device for photo management" and covers the photo gallery implementation used by Motorola on its mobile devices. Apple has the option to enforce an injunction, which would be unwelcome news for Motorola. The company would have to develop a new photo gallery that would skirt the patent. Apple could also force Motorola to recall all infringing devices on the shelves of German retail outlets and destroy all the infringing products in their possession.
Apple wins injunction against Motorola in Germany
Today the Munich I Regional Court handed down a decision awarding Apple an injunction against all Motorola products that violate a patent on "portable electronic device[s] for photo management." That overly broad-sounding claim appears to apply specifically to the bouncing over scroll animation found in the company's photo gallery application, so a small tweak to the existing software could quickly and quietly put this issue to rest. Still, according to FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, there is a small (and we do mean small) chance that Apple could choose to enforce the ban, which could require Motorola to destroy all existing products that violate the claim. This includes items already on shelves, which would have to be recalled. More likely though, despite Apple's victory regarding the zoomed-out in view in the Android gallery app, Motorola will continue to be able to sell the Xoom and two infringing phones. On a somewhat related note, is it safe yet to officially dub Germany the successor to Texas' Eastern District -- patent trolling capital of the world?Update: We erroneously stated that it was the zoomed-out view that was found to be in violation of the patent, when in fact it was the zoomed-in one. Motorola successfully defended itself against claims the zoomed-out interface also infringed on Apple's patents. Motorola reached out to us with the following statement: "Today's ruling in Munich, Germany on the patent litigation brought by Apple concerns a software feature associated with performing certain functions when viewing photos in a 'zoomed in' mode on mobile devices. We note that the Court ruled that performing the functions in a 'zoomed out' mode does not infringe on this patent. We expect no impact to supply or future sales as we have already implemented a new way to view photos on our products that does not interfere with the user experience."
Apple wins temporary ruling on iPad, iPhone sales in Germany
Apple scored a legal victory against Motorola in a case involving a standards essential (FRAND) patent that Motorola must license to other companies on fair terms. The Mannheim court originally ruled in favor of Motorola and Apple was forced to remove select iPads and iPhone models from its German online store earlier this month. Today, the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court ruled that Motorola may not enforce its injunction against Apple during the appeal process. According to FOSS Patents, this ruling suggests Apple's appeal will likely succeed and the two companies will reach a licensing agreement that's fair to both parties. The court documents note that Apple recently offered Motorola an amended licensing agreement that Motorola will likely accept. This ruling does not affect Motorola's other lawsuit against Apple that has shut down push email services for MobileMe and iCloud.
Shanghai court rejects Proview injunction, okays the sale of Apple iPads (update: Proview sues Apple in US courts)
The legal tussle between Apple and Proview over the iPad has swung in Cupertino's direction. According to Chinese news outlet Xinmin, a Shanghai court has rebuffed Proview's demand for an injunction halting the sale of the Apple tablet due to licensing issues. The Pudong New Area People's Court made the decision yesterday, stating that while the Guangdong court case has yet to make a final decision on who owns the "iPad" trademark, there wasn't enough evidence on Proview's side to honor an injunction.For those who've just caught up with the story, here's a quick overview: starting in 2000, Proview's Taiwan branch registered the "iPad" trademark in several countries, with the Shenzhen branch doing the same in China. Apple then bought worldwide rights from Proview Taiwan, which would have included China. Proview Shenzhen, who has gone into debt restructuring since 2010, is now saying that it never authorized its Taiwan counterpart to do so, but Apple claims that it has Proview Shenzhen's signatures on the paperwork. It looks like eventually it's going to get easier to grab that iPad in China, though if Apple's appeal case in the Guangdong court fails, then Proview could easily strike again with more ammo.Update: Looks like Proview is bringing the fight to Apple's home turf. We've just learned that the Chinese company filed a lawsuit against the Cupertino firm on February 17th in Santa Clara County, California, where it alleges deception in Apple's purchase of the iPad trademark. [WSJ]
Apple granted injunction in German patent suit, Motorola phones with slide-to-unlock at risk
Apple scored a huge victory today in Munich's Regional Court where Judge Dr. Peter Guntz found Motorola's implementation of slide-to-unlock on smartphones to be in breach of Cupertino's patent holdings. The ruling has resulted in a permanent injunction that Apple could execute at will, forcing Moto to alter the UX it employs across its device portfolio in Deutschland. The case originally focused on three separate applications of this gesture tech -- two for phones, alone -- but for now, the one used on the Xoom has been deemed outside of Apple's purview. Naturally, both parties are expected to appeal this decision, with Apple gunning for a total victory on every derivation of patent EP1964022 and Motorola seeking to overturn the win. Nonetheless, this particular legal triumph could help to set a precedent for the company as it continues to rage an IP war against fellow mobile industry rivals.
Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0N starts shipping in Germany
Just like the Galaxy Tab 10.1N, the 7.0N addresses the legal "issues" surrounding Samsung's slates. The tiny tablet was unveiled last month and now it's starting to hit shelves in Germany with its lawsuit-circumventing redesign in place. It's a little later than anticipated, but our friends in Deutschland can now pick up the tweaked Tabs starting at €499 for a 16GB WiFi version, while an HSPA+ model will set TouchWiz fans back €569.
WSJ: Apple seeks injunction to block sales of Samsung's Galaxy Nexus
Apple is asking for a preliminary injunction to block US sales of the Galaxy Nexus, according to the Wall Street Journal. The current suit, filed in San Jose's federal district court on Wednesday of this past week, accuses Samsung's phone of infringing on four Apple patents. The patents in question include "unified search," slide-to-unlock, data tapping (data detectors) and word completion technologies. FOSS Patents refers to them as the "Four Horsemen" of patent claims; the site also suggests that this action against the flagship Ice Cream Sandwich 4.0 Android device is attacking core features of "stock Android." The data detector patent (which identifies appointment dates, phone numbers or addresses and makes them clickable/actionable links) was already ruled valid by the ITC, but Google kept it in Ice Cream Sandwich without seeking a license from Apple. Apple is also pursuing action against Motorola in Germany; more here. The German suit is intended to block Motorola's attempts (and presumably Moto buyer Google's intents) to enforce high licensing fees on essential wireless patents it already licensed to Qualcomm, which makes the wireless 3G chips in the iPhone. Motorola asked Qualcomm to terminate Apple's licenses as of February 10, 2011. [Hat tip Apple 2.0]