law suit
Latest
Senator Schumer calls on DOJ to drop e-book price-fixing suit
Believe it or not, but that whole e-book price fixing fiasco is still an ongoing issue for the Justice Department. New York's senior senator, Chuck Schumer wishes it wasn't however, he simply wants the DOJ to drop the case and walk away. In a lengthy (factually questionable) op-ed in the Wall Street Journal the distinguished gentleman from the great state of New York said that a successful suit against Apple (he didn't bother to call out the others involved) would set the e-book industry back several years and allow Amazon to dominate the market unchallenged. He also makes a broader call for the administration to develop more clear guidelines for deciding what non-merger cases to pursue. Unfortunately, we have to point out, that his argument is undercut by some questionable data referenced in the editorial. According to Schumer Amazon once owned 90 percent of the e-book market -- a number that, if true, most certainly predates the release of the Nook. This is followed by an insinuation that Apple all but single-handedly toppled the retail giant with the launch of iBooks, cutting Amazons market share to just 60 percent. While the latter number sounds about right we'd hesitate to lay responsibility for that 30 point drop entirely at Apple's feet. To dig into Schumers op-ed yourself hit up the source link.
UK judge rules HTC doesn't violate Apple's patents, invalidates Cupertino's claims
Well, Apple had a few legal victories over the last couple of weeks, but it's just been handed a significant defeat by Judge Christopher Floyd. The UK court handed down a ruling that HTC does not violate four Apple patents, including the infamous slide-to-unlock claim. What's more, the judge ruled that three of the four patents in question were not valid, among them the aforementioned unlocking design. The only one of the four patents that stood at the end of the day was related to scrolling through images in the photo management app, but HTC did not infringe upon the claim. This follows the ITC refusing an emergency ban on HTC products in the US. Don't think you've heard the last of slide-to-unlock, however. As HTC, Apple and Samsung have repeatedly shown, they're just as interested in competing in the court room as they are on store shelves (if not more so).
Toshiba hit for $87 million in LCD price fixing verdict, maintains innocence
Toshiba decided not to settle when faced with allegations of price fixing, and now the company may have to pay the price. A jury handed down a verdict in the District Court for the Northern District of California today, hitting the company with $87 million in damages as part of a class action suit. The civil suit, separate from the criminal charges some of its alleged co-conspirators faced, wrapped today with the decision to award consumers $70 million and gave $17 million to manufacturers who purchased the company's panels. Toshiba may not actually have to pay up, however, thanks to settlements struck by others caught up in the same scandal, which could cover the damages. Regardless, the company maintains its innocence and actually plans to pursue "all available legal avenues" to reverse the decision. For more of Toshiba's response, check out the PR after the break.
Verizon appeals net neutrality rules, let the legal wrangling begin
We told you it was only a matter of time and, honestly, it took a bit longer than expected. Verizon has officially filed an appeal to the FCC's net neutrality rules, which are set to take effect on Novemeber 20th. It wasn't until the regulations were published in the Federal Register on September 23rd that they became fair game for legal challenges -- a technicality that resulted in Verizon's previous attempt to block the rules being tossed out by the US Court of Appeals in April. While Verizon senior vice president and deputy general counsel, Michael E. Glover, assures netizens that the company is "fully committed to an open Internet," it none-the-less takes issue with the FCC's attempt to institute new "broad" and "sweeping" regulations on the telecommunications industry. We're sure this is only the first of several cases that will be brought before the courts challenging the commission's authority. Stayed tuned to see if and when MetroPCS re-enters the fray, and to find out the ultimate fate of net neutrality here in the US. Check out the brief statement from Verizon after the break.
South Korean Apple tracking suit is 27,000 plaintiffs strong
That whole iPhone location tracking kerfuffle hasn't been making that many headlines here in the States as of late, but things are a bit different over in South Korea. Back in July, Kim Hyung-suk was awarded one million won ($932) from Apple Korea. Fresh from the win, the lawyer naturally got to work on a new suit. The suit now counts among its ranks 26,691 plaintiffs -- plus 921 minors who still need parental permission to join in -- all seeking the same one million won payout, for a total of around $26 million in damages. Apple, for its part, has yet to comment on the suit.
Samsung drops Apple countersuit -- Apple's still got a bone to pick
Back in April, Samsung slapped back at Apple's claims of patent infringement with a healthy helping of ten claims of its own. Now Bloomberg is reporting that Samsung quietly dropped its countersuit against the Cupertino-based company on June 30th, in an attempt "to streamline the legal proceedings." Of course that doesn't mean the saga is over: Apple's smartphone infringement accusations stand, as do legal battles in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and the UK. Samsung says it will also continue to fight Apple's accusations in the US in the form of a counter-claim. One down, one to go?Update: To clarify, this does not mean that Samsung has abandoned its own infringement claims against Apple. Those claims have been rolled into counter-claims in the original suit.
Hurt Locker lawsuit targets a record-breaking 24,583 IP addresses
It's been almost a year since the producers of The Hurt Locker filed a lawsuit against 5,000 alleged pirates suspected of distributing the film via BitTorrent. Now Voltage Pictures has updated its complaint, adding almost 20,000 IP addresses to the list of defendants. That makes it the largest file-sharing lawsuit of all time -- a crown previously held by the company behind The Expendables, according to Wired. The plaintiff has already reached agreements with Charter and Verizon to identify individual users, but no such deal with Comcast, who owns nearly half the supposedly infringing addresses. Linking those addresses with user accounts would let Voltage manage individual settlements -- probably somewhere between $1,000-$2,000 -- rather than continue legal action. All of this eerily echoes the Oscar-winning film's plot, about an adrenaline junkie who couldn't resist downloading just one more movie. Or defusing one more bomb. We're a little fuzzy on the details, but venture into TorrentFreak to scan for familiar IP addresses.
PayPal swiftly slaps Google with mobile payment suit
Just this morning we reported on the rather jovial atmosphere at Google's big mobile payment announcement -- well, it looks like PayPal's prepared to bring an end to the celebration. According to Bloomberg, PayPal filed a suit against Google today in a California Superior Court, alleging that former PayPal executive, and one of this morning's MCs, Osama Bedier misappropriated the company's trade secrets. The suit further fingered Stephanie Tilenius, also formerly with PayPal, of violating the terms of her contract in recruiting Bedier. Though we've yet to get our hands on any clear details about which trade secrets PayPal's pointing to, we'd say the timing speaks volumes.
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.
Accused Xbox 360 modder finds case pleasantly dismissed
The case of 28-year old CSU student Matthew Crippen has come and gone. Arrested last year on Digital Millennium Copyright Act violations -- specifically, for modding Xbox 360s to enable them to play pirated games -- federal prosecutor Allen Chiu announced on the third day of trial that the government was dropping its case against him "based on fairness and justice." It's not a complete surprise: according to Wired, on the previous day (Wednesday), an undercover agent testifying against Crippen claimed the defendant used a pirated game to test a modded console in his presence. That detail, required for the prosecution's case (the use of pirated software), was never mentioned in any of the previous reports or sworn declarations, so once the judge dismissed it as evidence, the case against Crippen hit a snag. Source link's got the full, very interesting tale, but if you're patient, there's always a chance one of the Law and Orders will pick up the story in the years to come.
Hurt Locker producer brings the pain (and lawsuits) to 5,000 suspected pirates
We heard earlier this month that Hurt Locker producer Voltage Pictures had teamed with US Copyright Group in an effort to go after individual BitTorrent users who downloaded the film. Now, it looks like the lawsuits have been filed, and boy, is there a lot of paperwork to go around. The lawsuit is targeting 5,000 defendants, currently unidentified but might soon be unmasked via subpoenas issued to the related ISPs. And what might the damages be? The Hollywood Reporter, Esq. blog cites a previous suit over the film Far Cry, where the plaintiffs demanded a minimum of $1,500 from each defendant, up to $150,000 for cases that make it to trial -- and no, there isn't a body suit in the US Army EOD unit strong enough to make it go away.
Warner Bros. head spin: lawsuit claims studio pirated anti-piracy patent
We'll let that headline sink in for a second -- it gets even better, we assure you. The story goes as such: German company Medien Patent Verwaltung (MPV) claims that in 2003 it showed Warner Bros. (under a confidentiality agreement) a way to track where exactly a pirated movie came from. One year later, according to the company, Warner started using the same technology without ever providing compensation. Thus, a lawsuit is born -- filed in both New York and Germany against Warner, Technicolor and Deluxe. As bad as it sounds, we can't help but love the irony of such an accusation, but the crème de la crème of all this? The New York lawsuit accidentally cites Warner's patent in place of MPV's. It's being amended now, but think about it: the name of the patent claimed to be a stolen patent was itself stolen by the original patent holder as its own patent. And that's really fun to say out loud.
Confirmed: Apple and AT&T signed five-year iPhone exclusivity deal -- but is it still valid?
The term of Apple and AT&T's iPhone exclusivity deal has long been a mystery -- although USA Today reported a five-year arrangement when the original iPhone came out in 2007, that number has never been independently confirmed, and it's been looking suspect in recent weeks as Verizon iPhone chatter has gotten louder. But we've been doing some digging and we can now confirm that Apple and AT&T entered into a five-year iPhone exclusive in 2007, based on court documents filed by Apple in California. Read on!
Hulavision sues NBC Universal, Hulu stuck in the middle with gloom
Ask Hulavision founder Errol Hula, and he'll tell you Hulu is a stolen idea, from concept to even the similarities in name. He's so confident, in fact, that he and his company have filed a lawsuit against NBC Universal, claiming a series of meetings (all under the umbrella of a nondisclosure agreement) with the media conglomerate and business development exec Raymond Vergel de Dios laid the foundation for its eventual web portal. The suit runs the gamut of brokenhearted business fellows: misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract (both implied and the NDA), breach of a confidential relationship, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and stolen ice cream on the playground. The suit seeks unspecified damages. Given the nature of these things, we doubt the two will ever get the point of actual courtroom entanglement, but if it does... can we get it streamed?
YouTube: Viacom would demand removal of videos it covertly uploaded itself
As you may have heard, Viacom and YouTube have been having a little tift lately, in the form of a major lawsuit by the former over copyrighted material posted on the video portal. It's a lawsuit that, according to YouTube, will cause such video sites to "cease to exist in the current form" -- but more importantly, it's a lawsuit that leads to some rather hilarious behind-the-scenes details. Here's a really juicy one that the official YT blog published today by Chief Counsel Zahavah Levine. Word has it that Viacom had hired over the years at least 18 different marketing firms to inconspicuously upload content. We can't really say it better than the posting: "[Viacom] deliberately "roughed up" the videos to make them look stolen or leaked. It opened YouTube accounts using phony email addresses. It even sent employees to Kinko's to upload clips from computers that couldn't be traced to Viacom." Wait, it gets better. According to Levine, Viacom's tactics were so good that the company itself didn't even know which videos it had uploaded, prompting multiple occasions where it would demand a clip removed, only to later ask for its reinstatement. "In fact," she claims, "some of the very clips that Viacom is suing us over were actually uploaded by Viacom itself." Hit up the source link for all the details. Honestly, we can't wait to see what else is dug up in these proceedings. Update: Of course, that's not the whole story. Also revealed in court documents today was discussions by Viacom to -- get this -- purchase YouTube before News Corp.'s Rupert Murdoch got the chance to do it himself. Let's be thankful for that judge's decision to unseal all court documents, shall we?
Dell joins dog pile, sues five LCD makers over price-fixing allegations
Looks like Dell is getting itself a membership in a club of which AT&T, Nokia, and the US Department of Justice are none too pleased to say they're members. The company has filed suit in a San Francisco court today against four Japanese LCD makers - Sharp, Hitachi, Toshiba, and Seiko Epson - and Taiwan-based HannStar. The crime at hand? None other than the much-chronicled LCD price fixing cartel. At least two of the aforementioned companies (Sharp and Hitachi) have already come forth to admit involvement and pay fines elsewhere, and now it looks like the troubles are still coming for them and others. If only there was some way the companies could band together to increase profits and help pay for these suits... oh, wait.
PA school district issued order to refrain from webcam spying (video)
Why a school district would ever think it was acceptable to secretly snap pictures of its students -- in their own homes, no less -- is totally beyond us, but with any luck the Lower Merion School District webcam caper will soon have its day court. Yesterday, an attorney for plaintiff Blake Robbins' confirmed that an agreement was reportedly finalized to stop the school from spying on its students while preserving evidence for the lawsuit. "What gets me in this situation is that I can't imagine there's a parent anywhere who would support the school district's actions here," said ACLU of Pennsylvania Legal Director (and all around good guy) Vic Walczak. "[W]hat the school allegedly has done here is the equivalent of the principal breaking into the house, hiding in the child's closet, and then watching him or her from there." Yuck! For more info on the technical aspects of this case, peep the video after the break. Update: Seems that someone dug up some of the school's policies surrounding the webcam surveillance, and suffice it to say, the bullet points listed here are downright crazy. How crazy? How's about "possession of a monitored MacBook was required for classes, and possession of an unmonitored personal computer was forbidden and would be confiscated." Oh, and "disabling the camera was impossible."
School allegedly uses students' laptop webcams for espionage, lawsuit ensues
Hold onto your butts, kids, we've got a doozy of a story. Let's take this one slow: a class-action lawsuit has been filed in Pennsylvania accusing the Lower Merion school district of "unauthorized, inappropriate and indiscriminate remote activation" of webcams in laptops issued to students, without prior knowledge or consent. The tale begins when Assistant Principal Lindy Mastko of Harriton High School informed a student that he was "engaged in improper behavior in his home"; the suit alleges that when pressed for details, Mastko told both the boy and his father that the school district could remotely activate the webcam -- a capability that is apparently being used. The school district has yet to respond to the accusations, so at this point we've only got the plaintiff's side of the story -- for all we know this kid took a picture of himself and somehow accidentally uploaded it on the school network. Then again, some purported Lower Merion students just emailed Gizmodo and claimed that their MacBooks' green webcam lights went on at random times, but they were told by IT support that it was just a technical glitch. Holy alleged invasion of privacy, Batman, this could get mighty interesting. PDF of the complaint available below. Update: The Lower Merion School District superintendent Christopher McGinley has issued an official response on its website, acknowledging "a security feature intended to track lost, stolen and missing laptops." Going further, he says the district " has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever" but that the matter is "under review." [Thanks, Yossi]
Spring Design denied injunction on sales of Barnes & Noble Nook
This shouldn't be seen as an indicator of future rulings, but Spring Design has been denied its injunction to halt Barnes & Noble from selling the Nook. According to court documents, there is "genuine dispute" over whether the Nook was derived by Spring Design's contributions or was independently developed prior -- in a nutshell, there's no way for the court, or anyone at this point, to know what's really going on here. The creator of Alex, who as we've previously chronicled had many behind-the-scenes meetings on developing the Android-assisted e-book reader before BN pulled out of the deal, can take solace in an expedited pre-trial process to accommodate for an earlier hearing date. So now the only thing stopping Barnes and Noble from selling Nook is... Barnes and Noble itself. Turns out that's a pretty formidable foe. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
AT&T sues Verizon over 'there's a map for that' ads
Whoa -- we just got word that AT&T is suing Verizon for false advertising over Big Red's "There's a map for that" ads. We're reading the complaint and motion to stop the ads right now, but here's what AT&T says is the big problem: In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn't offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T's wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive. AT&T also says its network reaches about the same number of people as Verizon's, so we're thinking it's a little miffed that it's being portrayed as an also-ran here. We'll update as we learn more, keep it locked! Update: So this seems like a very narrow lawsuit, actually. As we've been told, AT&T thinks Verizon is trying to fool viewers into thinking that they can't use any AT&T phone services outside of 3G coverage areas by showing two essentially different maps. Since Verizon's entire network is 3G, the gaps in the red map are actual service gaps -- but Verizon doesn't show that the gaps on the AT&T map might be covered by AT&T's huge 2G network. We can see how that could be misleading, but at some point you've got to compare apples to apples, and AT&T even says it has "no quarrel with Verizon advertising its larger 3G network" in its complaint, so we'll see how the court reacts. Update 2: Interestingly, Verizon's already changed the ads once at AT&T's behest, editing them to remove the phrase "out of touch" and adding a "Voice and data services available outside of 3G areas" small print disclaimer at the end. Apparently that wasn't enough for AT&T, which says the ads still confuse non-technical viewers into thinking AT&T provides no service at all outside of its 3G coverage. Update 3: Okay, we've read everything -- there's really not much more to this suit than the arguments over the maps. We're thinking Verizon could have easily dealt with this by just using dark blue and light blue on the AT&T map to differentiate between 3G and 2G coverage, but at this point we don't think Ma Bell is all that interested in anything except getting these ads off the air. All that said, it's hard to deny that Verizon's ads made a perfectly valid point: using an iPhone on AT&T's network in New York or San Francisco is an exercise in frustration, regardless of whether you have 2G or 3G, and we've had zero problems on Verizon. Let's just hope AT&T is working as hard to fight these ads with its actual service as it is with its lawyers. %Gallery-77177% %Gallery-77176% %Gallery-77178%
