PatentLaw
Latest
Judge calls Samsung vs. Apple 3G suit 'ridiculous,' suggests mediation instead
Annabelle Bennett is no stranger to Apple/Samsung litigation -- the Federal Court of Australia judge has had a hand in the companies' disputes for at least the past year. And it would appear that she's grown a bit impatient, following a Samsung move that she's labeled as "just ridiculous." According to a Bloomberg report, the trial began with Samsung's attorney stating that Apple refused to pay a fee to license three patents related to 3G data transmission. Apple's counsel, however, explained that the company did offer to pay, but Samsung refused. Bennett responded by asking "why on earth are these proceedings going ahead?," following up with "why shouldn't I order the parties to mediation?" -- a question she expects to be addressed by the end of the week. There doesn't appear to be any official ruling at this point, though the trial certainly isn't off to a great start for Samsung. Ultimately, the duo may be forced back to the negotiating table, letting Bennett move on to other cases until the next patent rouse.
NVIDIA and Rambus settle, sign patent deal, kiss and make up
Some of you thought it would never happen. You thought that these two mortal enemies would spend the rest of their multinational corporate lives alternately at each other throats and eyeing the other with suspicion from across the boardroom. After dropping some claims and winning others, Rambus has signed an agreement with NVIDIA that puts to rest their remaining legal disputes. The deal will allow NVIDIA to use patented Rambus tech in its products for the next five years, without fear of legal action -- though, neither side will say how much that privilege cost. Now that the battle between the two, which began way back in 2008, has finally come to a close we can all finally get back to the very important business of forgetting who or what Rambus is.
Microsoft, Alcatel-Lucent settle decade-old patent spat
It's no secret that Alcatel-Lucent and Microsoft have a long and somewhat litigious relationship, but today the two companies are letting bygones be bygones. CNET is reporting that A-L and MS have reached a "confidential settlement" in a patent dispute dating all the way back to 2002. Originally targeting Dell and Gateway, then-Alcatel alleged that information entry techniques used by Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Money and Windows Mobile violated a portion of its patent portfolio. Microsoft stepped in on the OEMs' behalf, and in a 2008 ruling, a court granted the newly formed Alcatel-Lucent over $350 million in damages -- subsequently reduced to $70 million in July of 2011 and further reduced to just over $23 million upon appeal. The final settlement is, as we said, unknown, but a Microsoft spokesperson was quoted as saying the deal is "to the satisfaction of both parties." No word on when the two will file their next multimillion dollar blockbuster lawsuit, but apparently both counsels will be sleeping easy tonight.
Samsung modifies Galaxy smartphones to satisfy Dutch court, plans to resume sales soon
Earlier this summer, a judge in The Netherlands ruled to ban sales of Samsung Galaxy S, S II and Ace smartphones, stating that the devices violated an Apple patent which deals with a "method of scrolling." Well, nearly two months have passed, and Samsung is just now getting around to releasing "upgraded" versions of the affected devices, presumably implementing a non-infringing scroll tool. A Samsung spokesman told Reuters that the three phones will "shortly be available for sale," neglecting to provide an exact release date -- so we wouldn't suggest lining up to get your Galaxy S II fix just yet. This small victory is only the latest in the Apple / Samsung lawsuit saga, which has created quite a stir in a handful of courts around the world. We have yet to hear about a solution to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban in Australia, for example, where fingers are being pointed in every direction.
Netherlands judge rules that Samsung Galaxy S, S II violate Apple patents, bans sales (updated)
A judge in The Hague just issued a ruling in Apple's patent infringement case against Samsung, prohibiting "the marketing of Samsung smartphones Galaxy S, S II and Ace for violation of Apple Inc. EP 2,059,868." In an official press release, the court explains that The Hague judge ruled to "ban trading of Samsung smartphones Galaxy S, S II and Ace," adding that Samsung also violated other did not violate Apple patents with its Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 10.1v. The judge determined that Samsung violated patent 2,059,868, which deals with "method of scrolling," but did not infringe 2,098,948 for "recording a flag in connection with multiple screen taps," or 1,964,022, which relates to dragging a slider to unlock the phone. We haven't been able to confirm, but from an online translation it appears that The ban will remain in effect through begin on October 13th. Hit up the source link for the full 65-page verdict (in Dutch). Update: A dutch IP attorney has pointed out that the judge has ruled patent 1,964,022 to be null and void, meaning Apple can no longer make claims in the Netherlands based on this patent. The judge also found that Samsung did not infringe on patent 2,098,948. The infringement of 2,059,868 does not affect the Galaxy Tab 10.1. (Correction: the main patent in question is 2,059,868 not 2,058,868.) Update 2: According to Tweakers.net, Samsung says that it will replace the software that infringes on Apple's patent (the Gallery application, specifically), which should allow it to continue to sell the phones. Notably, that Gallery application is the standard Android one used in Android 2.3, which also explains why the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is not affected by this ruling. Less clear is what the ruling means for other Android phones that use the same application. Update 3: Samsung Mobile's Kim Titus released the following statement: Today's ruling is an affirmation that the GALAXY range of products is innovative and distinctive. With regard to the single infringement cited in the ruling, we will take all possible measures including legal action to ensure that there is no disruption in the availability of our GALAXY smartphones to Dutch consumers. This ruling is not expected to affect sales in other European markets. Samsung has a proud history of innovation in the mobile industry. We will continue our plans to introduce new products and technologies that meet and exceed consumer expectations. And we will defend our intellectual property rights through the ongoing legal proceedings around the world. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
New York Times, OpinionLab sue Lodsys seeking declaratory judgement
Indie developers turned to the Web hours after receiving warning letters from Lodsys last month, but larger devs took a more traditional approach, leaving the communication and finger-pointing to lawyers instead. Two such companies, the New York Times and OpinionLabs, came to light after filing suit against the patent troll yesterday, seeking declaratory judgements to invalidate Lodsys's patents. A nine-page complaint filed by NYT lists four Lodsys patents, including 7,222,078, which had previously been used to target smaller developers. NYT's ad click-through system and OpinionLabs' surveys were both also targeted, and if the suits are successful, Lodsys would be responsible for all legal expenses, and wouldn't be allowed to collect on its patents in the future. We spoke with Julie Samuels of the EFF, who explained that filing for a declaratory judgment could theoretically enable NYT and OpinionLabs to have trials held in California and Illinois, where the declaratory judgments were filed, instead of the Eastern District of Texas -- the notoriously plaintiff-friendly court where Lodsys filed its suit against seven devs on May 31st. Other devs who received letters but have not yet been sued can also do the same. The suits brought by NYT and OpinionLabs formally call the validity of Lodsys's patents into question, but unfortunately don't change the game for devs Lodsys already sued, who would still be responsible for licensing fees and other damages if the court determines the patents to be valid (and their apps to be infringing).
Lodsys hits devs with lawsuit, $1,000 offer, and 1,000 words of eloquent prose
Are you sick of hearing from Lodsys? We know devs are, but the rather outspoken patent troll is at it again, hitting the blog to defend its good name. Hidden among today's posts is an announcement that the firm is taking the next steps with its accusations, filing a lawsuit against some of the developers it previously targeted and, get this, blaming Apple. It explains: "Lodsys chose to move its litigation timing to an earlier date than originally planned, in response to Apple's threat, in order to preserve its legal options." We're not sure which developers are targeted by this suit, specifically, but the firm has promised a $1,000 payment to each dev, "if it turns out that the scope of Apple's existing license rights apply to fully license you with respect to our claim relating to your App on Apple iOS." Devs may be tempted to spend that promised gift on a well-deserved vacation (or a WWDC conference pass), but with layers of LLCs protecting the man behind the curtain at Lodsys, we wouldn't be surprised it the firm disappeared before anyone sees a cent (or 99) of payment. Unfortunately, it appears that the saga continues, so if you've had enough of the patent troll, feel free to enjoy the rest of our content, Lodsys free. [Thanks, Andrew] Update: We've been told that the list of devs named in the lawsuit include: Combay, Iconfactory, Illusion Labs, Shovelmate, Quickoffice, Richard Shinderman, and Wulven Game Studios.
Lodsys shifts in-app purchasing target to Android devs following Apple response
We figured Apple's firm response to Lodsys earlier this week regarding its claims against iOS devs would prompt the patent holder to move on to its next target, and sure enough, it looks as if said target has been selected. Unfortunately, a group of Android app devs have now found themselves in the Texas-based company's crosshairs, which is citing the same patent infringement that Apple recently addressed, relating specifically to in-app upgrade purchases. As was the case with the last round of letters, Lodsys is demanding licensing fees from small, individual developers, who don't have the resources to fight back. Lodsys appears to be maintaining its trend of ignoring media requests, so we're keeping an eye on the patent troll's blog to see if anyone comes up to the surface to defend this latest round of allegations. In the meantime, plugging your ears while humming and ignoring the mailman might not be such a bad idea... you know, if you do this kind of thing for a living.
Apple responds to Lodsys infringement accusations, says developers are not responsible
Apple has responded to developers targeted by Lodsys, a patent holding firm that accused iOS devs of infringing on its intellectual property covering in-app upgrade purchases. In a letter from Apple dated today, the company claims that Lodsys's accusations are baseless, and explains that devs, or "App Makers," are "entitled to use this technology free from any infringement claims by Lodsys," because Apple has already licensed the technology on their behalf. Apple's response is firm, and as expected, the company is in full support of developers. Jump past the break for the full letter from Apple legal.
Lodsys vs. Apple Devs: EFF helps us dig deeper
The developers targeted by Lodsys's patent infringement accusations last week have been in a sleepless holding pattern, awaiting response from Apple before making their next moves. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) staff attorney Julie Samuels says that Apple legal is likely hard at work reviewing the patent in question, however, and should be in touch soon. Though it's very unlikely that Cupertino won't offer assistance, devs will also be able to turn to EFF for advice, where they may even be paired with pro bono patent attorneys. Besides offering this bit of good news, Samuels was able to help us dig deeper into Lodsys, and the dirty business of patent suits. To get some perspective, we reached out to Lodsys CEO Mark Small and EFF (which tends to side with developers). We have yet to hear back from Mr. Small, but EFF was kind enough to give us its take on the situation. Click through for the full rundown.
Lodsys comments on iOS patent infringement, receives hate mail, death threats
We'd typically expect a plaintiff to remain mum with legal action pending, but in a bizarre twist, Lodsys has taken to its blog to defend its reputation -- or something. You may recall the patent holding firm's letter, sent to individual Apple iOS developers last week demanding licensing fees for a somewhat-obscure patent. Understandably, the letters and related coverage prompted a negative response from developers and supporters. Posts to the Lodsys blog may be in response to inappropriate emails received over the weekend, which include death threats and "hateful bile" sent to Mark Small, the firm's CEO. Click on through for full details.
Lodsys warns iOS devs, alleges in-app purchases infringe its patent
A handful of iOS developers received letters this week from a patent holding firm claiming that their applications that offer in-app purchases infringe on the firm's intellectual property (IP). The letter threatens legal action if developers don't license the patent within 21 days. Lodsys, the firm in question, has apparently patented a system that collects usage data and facilitates feedback between a customer and vendor, though it doesn't address financial transactions specifically. The allegedly infringing applications use Apple's in-app purchase tool to encourage users to upgrade to a paid version after downloading a free app. Though it's possible that Lodsys has sent a similar warning to Apple, only individual developers confirmed receiving the document. This makes us wonder if the company is skipping the well-armed big target in favor of the little guys. Several developers posted on Twitter after receiving the letters, including Patrick McCarron (Shanghai for iPad), James Thomson (PCalc), and Matt Braun (MASH). They're understandably unwilling to share too many details at this point -- even though Apple developed the framework, developers could still be liable. Lodsys appears to be in the business of launching suits referencing U.S. patent 7,222,078, having gone after Canon, HP, Samsung, and other giants earlier this year. As the developers that have come to light so far are independent, with limited budgets, some have reached out to Apple legal for assistance, and are awaiting response. We aren't seeing the connection between the patent and in-app purchases, though that's ultimately up to a federal court to determine, if the firm even files a lawsuit. Drama in its finest form, folks.
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 for 'copying' the iPhone and iPad
Whoa! In the world of big-time lawsuits, this must be just about the biggest. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Apple has sued Samsung Electronics for copying "the look and feel" of its iPad tablet and iPhone smartphone. This relates to the Samsung Galaxy S 4G, which bears more than a passing resemblance to the iPhone 3G / 3GS models, and the slightly less obvious Epic 4G, Nexus S, and Galaxy Tab (presumably the older 7-inch model, since the newer ones aren't out yet) devices. The claim for intellectual property infringement is phrased as follows: "Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smart phone products and computer tablets, Samsung chose to copy Apple's technology, user interface and innovative style in these infringing products." The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of California on Friday and seeks injunctions against Samsung, damages (both actual and punitive), and a finding that the infringement was willful. Lest we forget, the rarest outcome in such legal tussles is for an actual judgment to actually be handed down, so the greatest likelihood is that this will just lead to another round of grudging handshakes and licensing going one way with money going the other way, but still, it's fun to see the big dogs barking at each other. Another aspect to these proceedings that shouldn't be overlooked is that, on the software front, they boil down to iOS versus Android (again). When Apple calls Samsung uninventive in its user interface, it's talking more about Android's perceived imitation of the iPhone's interface than whatever TouchWiz tweaks Samsung has slapped on top. And hey, if you're going to sue Google indirectly, you can't leave a major player like Samsung outside the courtroom, it just wouldn't be fair.
Google bids $900 million for Nortel patent portfolio, will use it as shield against patent trolls (update)
Google and Nortel have agreed on the princely sum of $900 million to start off a "stalking horse" auction -- wherein outside parties are still free to outdo Google's bid -- for the acquisition of Nortel's rather vast patent portfolio. The sale comes as part of the latter company's bankruptcy selloff and involves some 6,000 patents and patent applications, which encompass both wired and wireless communications, semiconductors, data networking, voice, and the internet -- going so far as to even touch on web search and social networking. The thing is, Google's not really enamored with these tidbits of intellectual property to the tune of nearly a billion dollars. No sir, a rather bitter blog post from the company this morning makes it quite clear that Google's acting in order to bolster its own intellectual property library and to "create a disincentive for others to sue." Both Android and Chrome get obliquely mentioned in Google's announcement as benefiting from the move, which should be completed by June of this year pending other bids and regulatory approvals. Update: Microsoft has noted that it has "a worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free license to all of Nortel's patents that covers all Microsoft products and services, resulting from the patent cross-license signed with Nortel in 2006." That license will also transfer with the sale of the patent rights. All that means is that Microsoft cannot be sued for infringing on that bundle of rights as it is already licensed to use them. That means Microsoft is extremely unlikely to participate in this auction -- other than, of course, as a means to prevent others from obtaining the same rights.
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.
Patent troll strikes again: OPTi heads after Apple this time
With a $7 million settlement from NVIDIA under its belt, and an AMD suit in process, OPTi is really coming on strong in this whole frivolous patent suit thing. Of course, we never were so up on that whole "Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses" family of patents (there's three of them, all named the same thing -- we know that much), so we very well could be overlooking a hefty amount of intellectual property owned by OPTi that the big bad computer industry -- in this case, Apple -- is trampling upon, but somehow we doubt it. The patent was filed on January 16th in the US District Court of Easter Texas, a popular spot for ill-advised tech-related patent law decisions. We can't say this one is looking good for Apple.[Thanks, DeShaun]
