sue
Latest
DirecTV and Comcast make amends, settle HD survey lawsuit
Apparently, DirecTV isn't looking to pay its lawyers any overtime over the holiday break, as it has been settling outstanding lawsuits recently like it's going out of style. Just over a week after it put aside its differences with Cox, the satellite provider has decided to make amends with Comcast over a suit filed in May. If you'll recall, DirecTV was quite flustered by Comcast's "survey," which allegedly found that two-thirds of respondents preferred Comcast's HD picture over that offered up by DISH Network / DirecTV. Notably, the actual terms of the deal weren't disclosed, but spokespeople from both outfits affirmed that they were satisfied with the outcome -- which, by the way, does allow Comcast to continue to cite the survey.
Sharp hits Samsung with another LCD patent suit
Apparently, slapping your rival with one lawsuit per year just isn't enough for Sharp, who is tossing yet another case Samsung's way over -- surprise, surprise -- LCD patent infringement. This complaint, which was filed in the Seoul Central District Court in South Korea, claims that Samsung has infringed on three patents relating to brightness, response times and viewing angles of LCD panels. As expected, Samsung spokesman James Chung noted that the firm would be "responding actively to the lawsuit," and Sharp is asking the court to "award it compensatory damages and prohibit the production and sale in South Korea of the products concerned." C'mon guys, can't we just all get along?[Via EETimes]
ITC dashes Qualcomm's hopes, rules in favor of Nokia
No, this isn't some horrific dream stuck on repeat. The legal quarrels between Nokia and Qualcomm are actually still ongoing, and while a US International Trade Commission judge has indeed issued an initial determination that favors Nokia, you can bet your bottom dollar that Qualcomm will be "petitioning the commission for a review." Nevertheless, judge Paul Luckern reportedly "found no infringement or violation by Nokia of the three asserted Qualcomm patents," which consequently led Nokia's CFO to proclaim that this was simply "another failed attempt by Qualcomm to mislead both Nokia and the telecommunications industry." Of course, we wouldn't recommend striking this battle off as complete -- after all, the determination now has to be forwarded on to the full commission for review, and it's not slated to dole out a final call until April.[Via Yahoo / Reuters]
Dell, Motion Computing sued for patent infringement over touch panels
You don't have to look far outside of the Eastern District of Texas to find yourself a fresh patent infringement case, and sure enough, that's precisely where this one was filed. Getting dinged up today is none other than the Round Rock powerhouse and Motion Computing, both of which are being sued for so-called willful infringement on Typhoon Touch Technologies / Nova Mobility Systems touch panel patents. Apparently, the two defendants are being accused of profiting off of two particular patents without paying the plaintiffs their respective royalties, and the lawsuit is seeking to "enjoin Dell and Motion Computing from the continued violation of [the] patents" while also extracting a presumably hefty sum of cash. No specific products are blamed, but we're told that the patents cover technology used in tablet PCs, slate PCs, handheld PCs, UMPCs, PDAs and a host of other gear.
IBM sues Shentech for selling volatile counterfeit batteries
It's not like ThinkPads have been immune to the notorious overheating battery issue, but a fiery incident in Ohio may not be IBM's fault. In a somewhat bizarre tale, it's reported that an Ohioan purchased a replacement battery from Shentech for his ThinkPad, only to later have it overheat, catch on fire and damage his machine. After discovering that the faulty cell was actually a counterfeit, IBM took the liberty of ordering a dozen batteries from the Flushing, New York-based company, and it soon discovered that all twelve received were indeed fakes. As you can probably guess, IBM has filed suit against the outfit and has asked the court to require Shentech to hand over all of its batteries for destruction, profits it made from selling the fakes and a million dollars "per counterfeit mark per type of item sold." That'll teach 'em to mess with Big Blue.[Via TGDaily]
Samsung and Matsushita close to settling PDP patent dispute
It takes some serious swallowing of pride -- or a rather large check -- for a company to put aside its legal beef with another and agree to move forward, but that's about to happen in the nearly two year-old dispute between Samsung and Matsushita. Reportedly, the two have "entered into a memorandum of understanding in which they have agreed in principle on terms and conditions of a formal settlement and cross-license agreement," which would finally conclude the bickering surrounding patents for plasma screens. Essentially, the two have accused each other of infringing on PDP-related patents for years, but it seems that all this holiday cheer has gotten the best of 'em. Notably, no terms of the (potential) agreement were loosed, but we're expecting some serious coin to change hands, regardless.
Nigerian firm sues Negroponte, OLPC for patent infringement
Just months after a slew of OLPC XOs made their way into Nigeria, a Nigerian-owned company is filing suit against Nicholas Negroponte and the OLPC Association for patent infringement. Lagos Analysis and subsidiary LANCOR filed the lawsuit on November 22nd in Nigeria, claiming that the aforementioned parties willfully and illegally reverse engineered its keyboard driver source codes. Turns out, LANCOR makes its ends by selling region specific-based keyboards that allow for direct access inputting of "accents, symbols and diacritical marks during regular typing," and sure enough, the XO's board looks mighty similar to those offered up by the plaintiff. Additionally, the outfit is in the process of "filing a similar lawsuit against OLPC in a United States Federal Court," so we'd recommend snagging an XO or two before Nik Neg and company are forced to inflate prices to pay off those highfalutin lawyers.[Image courtesy of Konyin and Digital Crusader]
Lawsuit claims iPod + iTunes bond is monopolistic
Although we aren't inclined to believe that this is the first time such a suit has been brought upon Apple, a new one claiming that the Cupertino powerhouse has unlawfully tied the iPod to its iTunes Store has made its way to the US District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint was filed by a Florida resident on behalf of all Florida-based iPod owners and iTunes Store customers, and it basically alleges that certain limitations -- such as the inability to play content purchased through iTunes on anything not labeled an iPod -- is "unreasonable and illegal under Florida's antitrust and unfair trade laws." Furthermore, the plaintiff claims that Apple willfully disabled embedded support for rival formats, and stated that it was "in possession of monopoly power in the portable digital media player market, the online music market and the online video market." 'Course, it's not like those lawyers at 1 Infinite Loop aren't used to this stuff by now, and we really can't see this being the beginning of the end (nor a catalyst for rule changes) for the oh-so-mighty iTunes Store.
Coalition urges FCC to halt Comcast's data tampering
Just a fortnight after the AP called Comcast out for tampering with some users' ability to swap files over P2P networks, a coalition has formally asked the FCC to stop the operator from interfering with such activity. The petition reportedly asks the Commission to "immediately declare that Comcast is violating the FCC's policy," and it's being supported by the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Media Access Project and professors at the internet practices of the Yale, Harvard and Stanford law schools (among others). Separately, Free Press and Public Knowledge are filing a complaint that asks the FCC to demand a "forfeiture from Comcast of $195,000 per affected subscriber." It's also said that this will be the "first real test of the FCC's stance on Net Neutrality," but there's no telling how long the Commission will wait before acting on the filings.
HP hit with patent counterclaims from Acer
We had a hunch that this spat between HP and Acer wouldn't just fade away into the sunset, and sure enough, HP is on the receiving end of the latest scuffle. Most recently, Acer has filed patent counterclaims against HP in the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin and with the US International Trade Commission, alleging that HP "infringed on patents related to personal computers, servers and peripheral devices." Unfortunately, that's about the extent of it, but Acer did go on to state that it would "take all necessary steps to protect and enforce its patented technologies." If the gloves weren't already off, we'd say they are now.
Vonage settles with Verizon, owes up to $117.5 million
The world's favorite ATM is being hit up for even more coin today, as Vonage (presumably begrudgingly) agreed to resolve the patent lawsuit between it and Verizon. Reportedly, the actual amount that the VoIP provider will be forced to pay "depends on how the Court of Appeals decides Vonage's pending petition for rehearing regarding two of the Verizon patents." The breakdown is like so: if Vonage wins rehearing on either patent in question "or if the injunction is vacated," it'll owe $80 million. If the outfit doesn't win rehearing on either patent or "if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction," it will soon find its thinning wallet a full $117.5 million lighter. Sounds like a prototypical lose-lose situation (or win-win, depending on perspective).
Verizon pays up for disconnecting heavy users of unlimited data plans
Regrettably, Verizon Wireless isn't the only carrier out there that once (or still does) recognized a mighty skewed definition of "unlimited" when it came to data plans, but for those still jaded from being cut off for "excessive use" earlier this year, justice has finally been served. The company has recently agreed to "reimburse the terminated subscribers for the cost of the laptop cards or laptop-connected cellphones" they purchased in order to surf the mobile broadband highway, and moreover, it'll be shelling out $150,000 in "penalties and costs" to New York state. Of course, the firm now makes clear that BroadbandAccess customers can be snubbed if they continuously stream audio / video content, enable P2P sharing or exceed 5GB of data usage per month, but it sounds like reimbursement is on the way for those disconnected when terms were more ambiguous.
NuVision sues Panasonic for trademark infringement
Although the casual HDTV fan may not be entirely familiar with NuVision's "High Definition Living" trademark, a recently filed lawsuit is likely to bring you up to speed. The Arizona-based display maker purports that its slogan has been in use since the company's inception in 2005, and now that it has finally received registration of the mark this month, it's targeting Panasonic for infringement. If you'll recall, Panny launched its "Living in High Definition" program earlier this year, which NuVision has taken serious issue with. According to its CEO, Panasonic has "knowingly and willfully infringed upon its mark," and another company exec even stated that the alleged culprit "believes that it is so large that the law does not apply to it and that it can copy [NuVision's] trademark with impunity." And considering that the aforementioned program is slated to run until March of next year, we highly doubt Panasonic is anxious to just ditch the slogan and move on.
Qualcomm's legal quarrels continue... against its own lawyers
If you had an inkling that Qualcomm's legal altercations were finally concluding, you'd be badly mistaken. Reportedly, the chip maker is now feuding with 19 of its own attorneys (or should we say, prior attorneys) over "who should shoulder the blame for what a judge called 'gross misconduct on a massive scale' at a past trial." Apparently, 21 crucial e-mails and some 200,000 pages of documents owned by Qualcomm were withheld until after Broadcom trials, which was unsurprisingly seen as a "carefully orchestrated plan and deadly determination to hold hostage the entire industry." Now, US Magistrate Judge Barbara Major is "considering sanctions" against the lawyers in question, which has placed their careers in danger and is "prolonging a damaging episode for Qualcomm." We're tempted to ask what could possibly happen next, but quite frankly, we're terrified of the answer.
Verizon sued for allegedly inflating FiOS subscriber numbers
Although FiOS just celebrated its second birthday last month, the third year isn't exactly off to a sensational start. Reportedly, Digital Art Services, a New York-based advertising company, has slapped Verizon Communications with a lawsuit alleging that the firm "overstated subscribers to its fiber-optic service and charged inflated prices for advertisements there." Essentially, the plaintiff is suggesting that Verizon included "pending customers" in its public subscriber reports which were "false and inflated." Interestingly, a spokesperson for Verizon stated that while he had yet to see the lawsuit, it sounded like a "garden variety business dispute." Of note, Digital Art was informed that pending customers could be included "as they were usually converted to active subscribers within two weeks," but it found that many prospective buyers "waited up to 10 months for their service to become active."
Nike, Apple hit with lawsuit over ripping Nike+iPod idea
Another day, another lawsuit aimed at Cupertino. This time, however, a Utah-based company is bringing Nike along for the ride, as it claims that the two firms willfully created and sold the Nike+iPod Sport Kit after refusing to incorporate their patent into the product. Apparently, Leaper Footwear successfully "patented in 1998 a unique breed of shoes which measures locomotive performance parameters such as a user's walking or running speed and / or distance traveled." Furthermore, Nike allegedly refused to take interest in the firm's patent, while it eventually went on to pursue and craft the same type of product some six years later. As predicted, the two plaintiffs are hoping to garner a (presumably large) sum of money "to be determined at trial, a permanent injunction barring Apple and Nike from further infringement on their patent" and a court order that they receive "three times the damages assessed at trial due to the willful and deliberate nature of Nike's actions."[Thanks, Mark]
Discontented iPhone owner sues AT&T, Apple and Steve Jobs
Rather than simply suing Apple, Steve Jobs or AT&T individually, Dongmei Li decided to throw all three under the bus. The suit, which was reportedly filed this week in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, accused the trio of "price discrimination, underselling, discrimination in rebates, deceptive actions and other wrongdoings for their role in the September 5th price drop on the iPhone." As you'd expect, Li was one of the folks who waited hours on end to be one of the first iPhone owners, and apparently feels quite slighted by the slashing. Purportedly, the plaintiff is hoping to secure "compensatory damages in the amount of $1 million" in addition to other punitive damages, and if you're up for a good laugh, hit the read link to browse through quite a few (more) comical gripes.[Thanks, Mark]
Vonage struck again as court partly upholds Verizon verdict
When it rains, it pours. At least we're pretty sure Vonage thinks so, as for the second time in as many days, the firm has been hit with terrible news on the legal front. Just a day after being ordered to pay Sprint a whopping $69.5 million for patent infringement, the VoIP provider is now hearing that the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit "partially affirmed" the Verizon verdict from March. For those who have forgotten, that case proclaimed that Vonage owed Verizon $58 million in addition to royalties on future revenue, but the appeals court did "direct the trial court to reconsider the verdict on one of the three patents and it vacated the damages and royalty awards." Notably, the "injunction has been stayed pending resolution of Vonage's appeal," but it will go into effect within a month if the outfit can't secure an emergency stay from the US Supreme Court.
Vonage ordered to pay Sprint $69.5 million, royalties on future revenues
While there was once talk of just selling Sprint the keys to the (crumbling) Vonage offices, it's pretty safe to say that those plans are no longer in the cards. Apparently, Vonage Holdings Corp. "was ordered in federal court to pay $69.5 million in damages for infringing on six telecommunications patents owned by competitor Sprint-Nextel," and if that wasn't punishment enough, "jurors ordered Vonage to pay a five-percent royalty on future revenues." If you'll recall, this isn't the first time Vonage has had to cough up major quantities of dough after being sued for patent infringement, and although a spokesman for the firm "declined comment," the company has already announced that it will "seek to overturn" the verdict.Read - Vonage to pay Sprint $69.5 millionRead - Vonage to Appeal Court Decision in Sprint Patent Suit
Verizon files lawsuit over open-access rules in 700MHz auction
Talk about gettin' riled up. Verizon Wireless has reportedly "challenged in federal appeals court the FCC's 700 MHz open-access rules," claiming that the auction "violates the US Constitution, violates the Administrative Procedures Act, and is arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by the substantial evidence and otherwise contrary to law." Once you're done swallowing that mouthful, it'll likely be difficult to resist rolling your eyes, as it's pretty clear whose interests are being looked after in the suit. Nevertheless, neither Verizon Wireless nor an FCC spokesman would comment further on the filing, but needless to say, at least one carrier isn't exactly kosher with that succulent 22MHz block of spectrum being so open.
