ruling
Latest
German court grants injunction against Apple for infringement of Motorola patents (update: Apple responds)
Motorola just confirmed that earlier today, the Mannheim District Court in Germany granted a default judgment in its case against Apple that bars the sale of Apple products in Deutschland. In addition to the confirmation, Motorola also issued the following, rather unrevealing statement: "As media and mobility continue to converge, Motorola Mobility's patented technologies are increasingly important for innovation within the wireless and communications industries, for which Motorola Mobility has developed an industry leading intellectual property portfolio. We will continue to assert ourselves in the protection of these assets, while also ensuring that our technologies are widely available to end-users. We hope that we are able to resolve this matter, so we can focus on creating great innovations that benefit the industry."The ruling comes as a role reversal of sorts for Apple, which most recently received a pair of injunctions in Germany, banning the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in that country, along with the rather embarrassing removal of the Tab 7.7 from the show floor at IFA. According to FOSS Patents this is a default judgment, meaning Apple did not respond to Moto's filing and as a result got hit with the injunction, which could result in its products being pulled or the company being required to pay damages. And so the saga continues... Dust off the pocket translator and hit up the source link for the full ruling in German.Update: We just got the following statement from Apple regarding the ruling: "This is a procedural issue, and has nothing to do with the merits of the case. It does not affect our ability to sell products or do business in Germany at this time."So, it appears our iDevice-loving German friends have nothing to worry about, at least for now.Update (11/7): FOSSPatents has posted a second update accessing the procedural rules, how they (might) affect this case and whether or not Apple has anything to worry about. If you can't get enough FRAND and Zivilprozessordnung news you can read through it -- we'll just hang on until the courts make another decision or someone's products actually get pulled from shelves.
Appeals court affirms Richard Garriott's lawsuit win against NCsoft
Ever since Richard Garriott won his lawsuit against former employer NCsoft last year, the legal process has been grinding on ever since to hash out the details. Today we've learned that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed the win of almost $32 million in favor of Garriott. The lawsuit came about after NCsoft fired Garriott in 2008 and then marked his departure as "voluntary," causing his stock options to expire instead of remaining intact through the end of his 2011 contract. In 2010 a court found NCsoft to have breached its contract, and it ordered the company to pay $28 million plus interest and attorney fees to Garriott and his legal team. This recent ruling affirms that outcome and paves the path for Garriott to be compensated. In the ruling, the 5th Circuit Court writes, "It would be unjust to allow NCsoft to sit back during trial, observe Garriott's litigation strategy, and then demand a new trial on damages when it dislikes the verdict." [Source: Androvett Legal Media press release]
Apple granted injunction against Samsung in Australia, no Galaxy Tab 10.1s allowed in the land of Oz
Among the many battlegrounds in the legal spat between Samsung and Apple, the case filed down under has had some of the most action. Just over a week ago, Apple wanted nothing to do with Samsung's attempt to settle the suit. Today, the crowd in Cupertino is glad that they rebuffed Sammy's overtures, because the Federal Court in Australia granted Apple's injunction barring the Galaxy Tab 10.1 from appearing in Aussie stores. That means that Sammy's svelte slate will not be for sale (legally, anyway) in Australia unless it can convince the court that its tablet doesn't infringe Apple's patents at trial. You've won this battle, Apple, time will tell if you win the war.
Psystar loses appeal in battle with Apple, told to ditch Mac clones for-ev-ver
We're sure Psystar, its lawyers and its tens of fans, didn't really expect to win the appeal it filed following the permanent injunction handed down against its commercial hackintoshes, but you can't blame the company for trying. A little over three years after the drama began, with Apple suing to ban Psystar's products, it seems the epic tale has come to an end. The company hasn't really been in business since December of '09 anyway, so today's ruling upholding the injunction won't make much of a difference either way. We're just sad that this may, in fact, be the last time we ever hear from Eugene Action -- let's take a moment to reminisce, shall we?
Judge rules in favor of employees fired over Facebook post, orders them back to work
The National Labor Relations Board has weighed in on the role of social networking at the office, determining that employees can't be fired for what they post on Facebook -- as long as they use the platform to talk about improving their workplace. The NLRB's ruling, announced on Wednesday, stems from an incident last year, when an employee at the Hispanics United of Buffalo non-profit organization went on Facebook to complain about a co-worker who accused her of slacking off at the office. Other colleagues soon chimed in on the woman's wall post with a slew of profanity-laced comments, before the targeted employee noticed the thread and reported it to a supervisor. Citing the agency's zero-tolerance policy on cyber harassment, the boss fired the five employees who participated in the online discussion -- including one who went on to file a complaint with the NLRB. Last week, administrative law Judge Arthur Amchan finally issued a verdict in the case, determining that the employees retained the right to talk about "their terms and conditions of employment," as stipulated under the National Labor Relations Act. Because this particular Facebook thread involved discussion of "job performance and staffing levels," Amchan ordered Hispanics United to reinstate the employees. The decision marks the first time that an administrative judge has ruled on a Facebook-related workplace case, though the NLRB says it's received "an increasing number of charges related to social media in the past year" -- so it likely won't be the last. You can read the Board's statement in full, after the break.
ITC patent ruling against Apple will stand, Kodak nods approvingly
July is shaping up to be a pretty good month for Kodak. Just a few weeks after granting the camera-maker a second wind in its ongoing patent battle against Apple and RIM, the ITC has issued yet another decision in its favor, determining that a May ruling against Cupertino will stand. At issue is an Apple complaint, filed in April 2010, charging Kodak with infringement of two patents on image processing and power management. On May 12, ITC Judge Robert Rogers shot down Apple's attack, ruling that the patents were not infringed and that one of them was invalid. The full Court had been scheduled to review Rogers' decision later this year, but that won't be happening, now that the ITC has decided to close the investigation (see the PDF, below). Kodak was understandably pleased with the result, though its focus will now turn to August 30th, when an administrative law judge is expected to weigh in on the company's patent offensive against both RIM and Apple.
WTO says China's rare earths export controls violate international rules, US applauds
China's monopolistic approach to the rare earths market is in violation of international trade regulations, according to a new ruling from the WTO. The verdict, issued yesterday, covers exports of nine minerals -- including zinc, manganese and magnesium -- that are used to produce a wide variety of smartphones, tablets and other gadgets. China, which controls about 95-percent of the world's rare earth supply, had previously argued that its export restrictions were needed to prevent overproduction and to conserve natural resources, but the WTO determined that the country was "unable to demonstrate" these environmental benefits. The investigation was originally spurred 18 months ago, after the US and other countries complained that China's quotas and tariffs unfairly favored domestic manufacturers, while distorting global prices. Experts expect Beijing to appeal the ruling, but this extra international pressure, combined with shifting supply chains and newfound deposits, may bring about the changes many have been calling for. If it doesn't, we'll all be stuck with corn phones.
US Supreme Court strikes down California law, says video games are protected as free speech
It's already been found unconstitutional by lower courts, and now the Supreme Court of the United States has finally weighed in on the infamous California state law that sought to ban the sale of violent video games to minors. In a seven-to-two ruling on the Brown v. The Entertainment Merchants Association case, the Supreme Court said that video games are indeed protected as free speech under the First Amendment, and noted that under the constitution, "esthetic and moral judgments about art and literature . . . are for the individual to make, not for the Government to decree, even with the mandate or approval of a majority." Inevitable, perhaps, but still a fairly historic day or the video game industry -- and one that we're guessing will be a bit more positively received than a certain other milestone involving violent video games this year. You can find the complete ruling in PDF form at the source link below.
ITC judge rules against Apple in patent infringement case, Kodak smiles
The International Trade Commission has weighed in on one half of the ongoing Apple-Kodak legal saga, ruling in favor of the team from Rochester. In a decision handed down yesterday, ITC Judge Robert Rogers determined that Apple's allegations of patent infringement are unfounded, adding that one of the company's patents is invalid. At issue are two digital camera technologies owned by Apple. One allows a camera to process multiple photos at the same time, while the other enables users to simultaneously adjust an image's balance, color and resolution. Apple claimed that Kodak illegally used these mechanisms in its Z-series, M-series, C-series, and Slice cameras, in addition to some video cameras. Judge Rogers clearly disagreed, though he won't be able to publicly explain his reasoning until both sides have had enough time to review confidential documents. Rogers' decision will also be subject to review by the full ITC, which is expected to issue a yea or nay on September 19th. A Kodak spokesman said the company is understandably "pleased" by the decision, but it won't have much time to rest on its laurels. On May 23rd, the ITC will announce a decision in a patent lawsuit that Kodak filed against both Apple and RIM, way back in January 2010. Stay tuned.
Court rules in Sony's favor against LG, PlayStation 3 free to enter Europe again
Well, it looks like there won't be a widespread PlayStation 3 shortage in Europe anytime soon -- the Hague's civil court of justice has just ruled in Sony's favor in its dispute with LG, and ordered that the 300,000 PS3s currently seized by customs be released to Sony for distribution across the continent. LG has also reportedly been ordered to pay €130,000 in legal fees -- and if it doesn't comply, it will face a fine of €200,000 per day until it does. That doesn't mean that the tussle between the two companies is over, however, as this ruling doesn't have anything to do with the patents at the heart of the dispute. [Thanks, Manit]
Judge in Sony vs. Geohot orders YouTube and others to give up users' personal info
Remember when Sony sued Geohot and demanded that YouTube hand over the user info of all the folks who posted comments to Geohot's PS3 jailbreak video? Well, score a victory for SCEA, as the judge overseeing the case's jurisdictional discovery process has ruled that Sony can get what it wanted -- information from: Bluehost (who hosts Geohot's website) regarding who downloaded the jailbreak, Twitter regarding any tweets made by Hotz, Google Blogspot regarding comments made on his blog, and the aforementioned YouTube user data. Keep in mind that Sony's getting this information to show that many of the downloaders and commenters are from Northern California and that Hotz's hacking efforts were aimed at Californians -- meaning the case should remain in the Bay Area instead of moving to New Jersey where Geohot hacked his PS3. With this new information at its disposal, Sony's better equipped to oppose Hotz's motion to dismiss in a hearing early next month, but this doesn't mean the company will succeed in its bid to keep the litigation a West Coast affair. We'll have to wait and see if this latest victory helps Sony win the war. Stay tuned.
Canadian government vows to reverse CRTC decision on usage-based internet billing
It's happened before when Canadian government overturned the CRTC's decision and allowed Globalive to enter the Canadian cellphone market, and it looks like Ottawa is about to again weigh in and reverse an even more controversial ruling by the regulatory agency. As confirmed by Industry Minister Tony Clement on Twitter, the government plans to overturn the recent CRTC decision that effectively imposed usage-based internet billing if the agency doesn't back down and "go back to the drawing board." Citing a senior government official, The Toronto Star further reports that the reversal could come as early as next week. As any Canadians reading this may well be aware, the issue of usage-based internet billing has been simmering for some time, but it reached a tipping point with the CRTC's decision last week that affected smaller internet service providers who rely on the major telecom companies' networks. Under the new ruling, those companies would be have been faced with increased costs that would drastically limit the amount of maximum amount of data they're able to offer to customers each month -- one such ISP, Teksavvy, had in fact already sent out notices to customers informing them that their current 200GB cap would be dropping to just 25GB on March 1st, with any additional data use to be charged by the gigabyte. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in] Update: The CRTC has announced that it will review its decision, and delay any implementation of it by at least 60 days.
Judge awards Stargate Worlds assets to Cheyenne Mountain, MGM terminates license [Updated]
The saga of Stargate Worlds took another interesting twist this week as an Arizona judge ended the legal battle over the assets of Cheyenne Mountain Entertainment. The company -- which is currently languishing under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection -- will retain control of all its game-related resources. The action settles a fraud complaint initiated by Cheyenne against Dark Comet Games and Fresh Start Studios, both formed by former Cheyenne employees looking to use company materials for the Stargate Resistance shooter released earlier this year. Though the ruling grants Cheyenne full control of its Stargate assets, completion of the long-suffering Stargate Worlds MMORPG is doubtful due to the recent expiration of the IP license from MGM Studios. Cheyenne founder Gary Whiting told the gaming blog Nerdvana that MGM issued a termination notice on November 3rd. While the notice doesn't affect Stargate Resistance, it does provide a huge obstacle for MCA Financial Group's bid to save the license for Stargate Worlds. MCA is a Phoenix-based company called in to supervise Cheyenne's restructuring under Chapter 11. [Update: Apparently, there's some discrepancy with what Nerdvana is reporting, or what Gary Whiting is saying. This blog post explains a bit more on how the judge actually didn't award full control of SGW back to Cheyenne.]
USPTO rules against TiVo's "Time Warp" patent, but the fight vs. DISH rages on, again
The never ending TiVo / DISH Network patent saga continues, with the latest twist presented as U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ruled TiVo's "Time Warp" patent is invalid. Both sides have issued press release in response, with TiVo pointing out this is "just one of several steps" in the review process" while DISH's Facebook status was predictably "pleased." For now, the only thing to report is that, as usual, nothing has really changed, the Appeals court is still undertaking a review of its previous ruling, and it will probably finish that before this Patent Office decision is resolved , given the opportunity for appeals to its board, and even through the federal courts. Still, depending on how this goes, it could have the most affect on TiVo's lawsuits against Verizon and AT&T, but right now we're just going to go grab (another) Snickers, this one will be going on for a long while yet.
Is Canada's iPod tax back? And if so, will BJ Snowden get her cut?
We know, BJ Snowden is an American artist -- but since her song "In Canada" is probably on every iPod and computer up north, we have to wonder whether a proposed amendment to the Canadian Copyright act will help her finally get what's coming to her. The brainchild of the New Democratic Party's Charlie Angus, the bill would extend 1997's Private Copying Levy "to the next generation of devices that consumers are using for copying sound recordings for personal use." Proponents of the plan says that it ensures that artists get paid for their work -- essentially, the government wants you to pay upfront for the music you're likely to steal anyways by taxing your next digital audio player purchase. Of course, much about the plan doesn't make sense (it doesn't address digital video, for instance, or the computers that people use to download and store their music in the first place) but we guess we'll let the Canadian government hash that one out. This is obviously not a new idea, and it is one the courts have rejected already, but who knows? Maybe this time it will "take." Lets hope not, eh? Update: No surprise, but the levy is already being shouted down by Industry Minister Tony Clement calling it "totally nonsensical" and "180 degrees in the wrong direction" with regard to the government's strategy to embrace the internet, not stifle it.
Court rules against Comcast, Cablevision on new FCC program access rules
Comcast and Cablevision's quest to keep the HD feeds of the networks they own off of satellite and telco services was again dealt a loss Friday when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld new FCC rules requiring them to share. Neither found that pleasing, with Comcast citing the continued exclusivity of NFL Sunday Ticket and NASCAR Hot Pass to DirecTV, while Cablevision whined about its latest spat with ABC. This might not be the end of things however, as the court voted the FCC could later rescind the rule if it decides it "is no longer timely," and it will likely play a part in the ongoing discussions over Comcast's proposed purchase of NBC.
Pop culture loves the iPad: Paper presentation, Parry Grip anthem
All of Apple's devices have been embraced by pop culture sooner or later, but I think the iPad has probably nabbed the record for quickest to the bear hug. Here's two silly things we've seen today, just a week after the iPad's official announcement. First up, songsmith Parry Gripp's latest mini-tune is all about the iPad, and as you can see above, it's actually a pretty interesting commentary on just how successful the device will likely be: we may argue about which kinds of nachos are ruling, but we can all agree that nachos in general are awesome. Second, the iPad announcement itself has even been immortalized in papercraft. And if you want your own paper-based recreation of last week's event, you can download the plans and put it together yourself. Weird? Yes. Strange? Very. But for a company that wants to sit at the intersection of technology and the liberal arts, Apple's mission is pretty much accomplished.
Court orders Microsoft to stop selling Office 2007 by January 11th
Update: A statement from Microsoft's director of public affairs, Kevin Kutz, clarifies the affected versions. Note that Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac was not cited as an infringing product, so this ruling is not applicable to Mac versions of Office. We have just learned that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has denied our appeal in the i4i case. We are moving quickly to comply with the injunction, which takes effect on January 11, 2010. This injunction applies only to copies of Microsoft Word 2007 and Microsoft Office 2007 sold in the U.S. on or after the injunction date of January 11, 2010. Copies of these products sold before this date are not affected. With respect to Microsoft Word 2007 and Microsoft Office 2007, we have been preparing for this possibility since the District Court issued its injunction in August 2009 and have put the wheels in motion to remove this little-used feature from these products. Therefore, we expect to have copies of Microsoft Word 2007 and Office 2007, with this feature removed, available for U.S. sale and distribution by the injunction date. In addition, the beta versions of Microsoft Word 2010 and Microsoft Office 2010, which are available now for downloading, do not contain the technology covered by the injunction. While we are moving quickly to address the injunction issue, we are also considering our legal options, which could include a request for a rehearing by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals en banc or a request for a writ of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court. Whoa. A judge for the The U.S. Court of Appeals has just upheld an earlier verdict forbidding Microsoft from selling both Office and Word after January 11th, 2010. This suit, which was filed by i4i, a creator of a XML plugin for Microsoft Office, alleged that Microsoft's Open XML format, which uses the DOCX and XLSX extensions that have been a part of Office on the Mac since Office 2007, violated i4i's patented XML handling algorithms. The court ruled in favor of i4i back in May, and Microsoft today lost their appeal, with the judge telling them that they don't have the right to sell the software as-is. Microsoft now either has to attempt to appeal the ruling again, or settle with i4i (read as: "Ballmer has to write a big honking check"), and is currently considering further legal options. The company is also working to remove these features from Microsoft Office (possibly in time to release new versions of the old software on January 11th), and this ruling doesn't affect the upcoming Office 2010 for Windows. We'll keep you posted if anything further develops.
Apple wins fight in U.K. over iPhone v Android claims
The U.K. advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Authority, says Apple is correct when it claims its App Store is better than the Google store for the Android. In a TV ad Apple claimed that the iPhone had apps for "just about anything". Fans of the Google Android, or at least ten of them, complained that their phone offered a similar and equal function. Apple responded that it made the claim "only on the iPhone" because its App Store "provided users with a unique experience unmatched by any other application marketplace, including the Android Market". "Because Apple had shown there were far more applications available for the iPhone than the G1 phone, and user experience of the iPhone and the App Store was distinct from its competitor, we concluded that the claim 'only on the iPhone' was justified and not misleading," said the ASA in its ruling. The Apple App Store has about 50,000 applications, while Google offers about 2,100. In the past, Apple hasn't done too well with the ASA. In November an iPhone ad was banned for misleading customers about the speed of the phone on the internet. Apple also had to pull ads for its first generation iPhone in August of 2008.
Baseball umps cite HDTV, SportsCenter for changing the way games are called
While we were just getting used to the football, hockey and basketball offseason, baseball umpires have piqued or interest with a statement that HDTV has changed the game. Now that viewers at home (& in the stands) have high res screens and feeds, not to mention DVRs to go frame by frame as many times it pleases them and constant replays on SportsCenter it's changed the way they call close plays on the base paths. Of course, we don't think that calling the game more accurately within the rules is a bad thing, but as this week's dustup involving Derek Jeter showed, not everyone has gotten the message, we're thinking a HD replay booth may be in order. Any longtime baseball fans noticed games getting called tighter over the last decade or so?
