lawsuits
Latest
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]
Apple gives up on Asteroid suit
Remember that rumored Firewire breakout box (codename: Asteroid) for Garageband that was leaked to a few websites? You know, the one that Apple decided was important enough to sue said bloggers to find out who their sources were? Ahh, I thought you would.Apple won the first ruling which would have made the websites turn over their sources, if said websites hadn't won the appeal. Apple has decided that it isn't worth their time to try and appeal that appeal, and so it looks like the bloggers won.Finally, I can safely blog about all the inside Apple information I have.... so any Apple employees want to give me any dirt?
Verizon sues Vonage over patent infringement
It wouldn't be a full day here at Engadget without someone suing someone else for patent infringement, and thankfully Verizon has stepped up to the plate to provide our daily dose of entertaining legal shenanigans. The telecom giant has filed suit against VoIP provider Vonage in Richmond, Virginia's U.S. District Court, claiming that certain aspects of Vonage's Internet telephony business -- specifically its methods for interfacing between packet-switched and circuit-switched networks, billing customers, detecting fraud, and providing enhanced calling services -- violate at least seven of Verizon's closely-guarded patents. What really seems to be getting under Verizon's skin is the fact that Vonage has added 1.1 million new customers in the past 15 months -- many of whom are claimed to be "Verizon's former customers" -- by "aggressively marketing and advertising services made with Verizon's appropriated intellectual property." Vonage, of course, denies any wrongdoing, and claims in language we've heard so often before that it will "vigorously defend the lawsuit;" investors, however, don't seem to be quite as sure that Vonage is in the right here, as evidenced by the 12% tumble that the company's stock took today.
Cable giants being sued for VOD patent infringement
If nothing else, you've got to admire the tenacity of a Connecticut-based firm called USA Video Interactive, which just days after losing what seems to be a final appeal in its lawsuit against Movielink, decided to go after almost all of the country's major cable operators for supposedly infringing on the same patent. Comcast, Cox, Charter, and Time Warner (disclosure: Time Warner owns the company that owns the network that includes Engadget) are all named in a suit filed Tuesday in a U.S. District Court in Texas by USA Video (maybe Cablevision got spared because of all its other legal woes), which claims that like Movielink, the cable giants are violating its so-called Store-and-Forward Video-on-Demand patent (#5,130,792, filed in 1990) by using protected technology in their own VOD services. Besides making patents, the company also offers various products revolving around email, web tools, digital video watermarking, and content delivery infrastructure, so it's probably not appropriate to bunch it in with other lawsuit-happy -- but seemingly less legitimate -- claimants such as NTP and Visto.[Via TechWeb and Digital Media Thoughts]
RIAA declares music piracy "contained"
If we're to believe RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol's take on the current state of digital piracy, it would appear that enough consumers have been swayed by the music industry's carrot-and-stick approach of cheap songs and highly-publicized lawsuits that illegal downloading, although not eliminated, has finally been "contained." Even though physical album sales are still declining, Bainwol claims that the rapid growth of legal digital downloads -- up 77% in the past year -- balance out the loss, proving that iTunes, Napster, Rhapsody, and the like are offering compelling services that have encouraged folks to give up their lives of crime. Bainwol certainly paints a rosy picture here, and while we'd love to imagine that our fellow Netizens have suddenly and inexplicably developed a group conscience, what seems much more likely is that higher bandwidth and the advent of the torrent have simply turned former music pirates from the RIAA's nightmare into the MPAA's.
Cablevision postpones networked DVR
Under heavy pressure in the form of a lawsuit filed by nearly all of TV land's major content providers, industry giant Cablevision has announced that it will delay the rollout of its networked DVR offering until the service's legality is confirmed in court. The lawsuit, filed by the four key networks and their parent studios, claims that Cablevision's plan to store customers' recorded swag on their own servers as opposed to local set-top boxes constitutes a retransmission of copyrighted material, and therefore violates pre-existing agreements the company has with its providers. Cablevision, on the other hand, argues that networked DVR services are only facilitating "fair-use" of their broadcasts by consumers, who have already paid for any programs they intend to record. The outcome of this suit will be closely monitored by other players in the cable industry as well, because a victory for Cablevision would allow Cox, Comcast, et al. to begin offering their own remote storage -- good news for consumers, but perhaps bad news for our old friend TiVo.
XM will "vigorously defend" Innos against industry suit
XM is firing back against the recording industry's lawsuit over the Pioneer Inno's ability to temporarily store copyrighted material, stating rather boldly in an open letter to its customers that "we will vigorously defend these radios and your right to enjoy them in court and before Congress, and we expect to win." Claiming that the record labels "don't get it," XM argues that consumers have always been free to tape over-the-air content from a variety of sources, provided that they restrict those recordings to personal use. What's more, the Inno doesn't even let you transfer recorded content to other devices, and deletes all of your tunes if you drop your XM subscription, so it's already much more restrictive than the recording devices faced by TV and terrestrial radio broadcasters. Instead of actually expecting XM to pay $150,000 for each song recorded by Inno users (which would probably amount to at least several billion dollars), it's more likely that the music industry is using this suit to coax XM into joining rival Sirius in coughing up additional licensing fees. Also, a note to XM PR: despite your suggestion that the record labels are attacking sat radio owners at the expense of a war on the "real" pirates, we think that the industry is both well-prepared and well-equipped for a multi-front conflict.[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
