suit
Latest
RIAA suing citizen for copying legally purchased CDs to PC
Sure, we've heard RIAA-admiring lawyers affirm that ripping your own CDs is in fact "stealing," but it seems the aforementioned entity is putting its money where its mouth is in a case against Jeffrey Howell. Reportedly, the Scottsdale, Arizona resident is being sued by the RIAA, and rather than Mr. Howell just writing a check and calling it a day, he's fighting back in court. Interestingly, it seems that the industry is maintaining that "it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into their computer." Ira Schwartz, the industry's lawyer in the case, is arguing that MP3 files created on his computer from legally purchased CDs are indeed "unauthorized copies," and while we've no idea what will become of all this, we suppose you should go on and wipe those personal copies before you too end up in handcuffs.Update: We got some more info on the case -- it looks like Jeffrey's actually being sued for illegal downloading, not ripping, but this whole "ripping is illegal" tactic is still pretty distasteful. Check out this post for the full story.[Via BlogRunner]
Darren Murph12.29.2007
City of Chicago sued for illegally ticketing in-car yappers
So, you've got an outstanding ticket from talking while behind the wheel in Chicago, do you? Meet attorney Blake Horwitz, who is now likely to be the best friend you don't even know. Reportedly, Mr. Horwitz is suing the city and claiming that arrests of citizens caught driving and talking were in fact illegal, and furthermore, he's demanding that Chicago "dismiss any outstanding tickets and refund almost $2 million in fines collected since 2005." Apparently, the actual law that prevents users from yapping and motoring requires that the city erect signs that instruct drivers not to converse while driving, yet such signs have purportedly not been posted across Chi-town. The devil's in the details, we suppose.[Image courtesy of ImportTuner]
Darren Murph12.21.2007
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.
Darren Murph12.21.2007
T-Mobile gets in Telus' face over use of "My Faves"
T-Mobile launched its myFaves service back in October of 2006, a service that's proven popular with customers -- and apparently, it's gaining popularity with other carriers 'round the world, too. In Canada, Telus unveiled a program whereby five numbers of your choosing get unlimited calling and texting in May of this year; sounds familiar, right? Yeah, it is -- same deal as myFaves, actually -- and that probably wouldn't have riled up T-Mobile. The Deutsche Telekom division doesn't deal much with Canada, after all, and a little international copycatting never hurt anyone, right? Indeed, we figure Telus probably would've gotten away with the promotion had they not decided to call it... wait for it... "My Faves." Now yes, we understand that the "M" is capitalized and they've used two words instead of melding them into one, but come on. Needless to say, T-Mob is less than pleased with the branding and has filed a trademark infringement suit in federal court up in the Great White North with the intention of getting Telus to go with something a little less familiar (say, "Fy Maves," for example). For what it's worth, Telus jumped on the Canadian trademark for its service a month before T-Mobile did, but we're pretty sure the whole prior art concept might apply here.
Chris Ziegler12.15.2007
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]
Darren Murph12.13.2007
Lawsuit claims Virgin Mobile told a little lie to boost IPO showing
Virgin Mobile's October IPO raked in a solid $412.5 million -- a little bit off its highest estimate, yeah, but still boatloads (and when we say "boatloads," we mean "hundreds of millions of dollars") higher than what it had thought it could get when it first announced its intentions to go public. A new class action suit alleges that the $412.5M figure was inflated, though, by Virgin's fudging of third quarter revenue figures which conveniently have since been revised down to indicate a $7.3M loss. Unfortunate coincidence? Maybe, but Virgin's stock fell a solid 14.4 percent on news of the redone numbers, so we can understand that a few shareholders might be grumbling about the sitch. Meanwhile, the MVNO's form letter reaction to the news is in full effect, claiming that the lawsuit is "completely without merit," so we're guessing this one's gonna be tied up in the legal system for a hot minute or two.
Chris Ziegler12.03.2007
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]
Darren Murph11.30.2007
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.
Darren Murph11.29.2007
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]
Darren Murph11.28.2007
Qualcomm wins a legal round against Nokia in the US, too
Wasn't long ago that a Dutch court was showing Nokia the door in its battle to get Qualcomm chips banned; granted, the case was thrown out on a legal technicality, but a win's a win as far as Qualcomm's concerned. Now a US International Trade Commission court has made the same ruling on yet another technicality, upholding an earlier decision to throw out the case based on the fact that there's already arbitration pending between the two companies in California. The whole spat stems from Nokia's belief that certain Qualcomm chips infringe on Nokia patents; in the big picture, though, the suit is just one of over a dozen pending or underway around the globe, making Qualcomm and Nokia pretty bitter enemies by our calculations. Can we watch this all go down on pay per view or something?[Via mocoNews]
Chris Ziegler11.22.2007
Patent holding firm sues everyone over international SMS
Every time you send a text message to someone in another country, a Maryland man dies a little bit inside. The obviously-named Technology Patents LLC, a patent firm run out of Maryland, says that it holds jurisdiction over every international SMS sent or received in its home state thanks to a pair of recently-awarded patents that cover routing of text messages across the internet as they travel from country A to country B. Naturally, there are boatloads of operators that can send an SMS to Maryland and several that can send 'em from Maryland, so yeah, pretty much everyone is getting sued -- a whopping 131 companies in total. Fortunately, Technology Patents LLC isn't asking for much; it wants nothing more than a permanent injunction against all US carriers from sending or receiving international text messages along with a big wheelbarrow full of cash for its troubles. For what it's worth, the dude running this firm apparently has a spotty past with more than his fair share of legal run-ins, so we're not getting too worried yet. Just in case, though, y'all may as well check to make sure you're not named on that list of 131.[Via textually.org]
Chris Ziegler11.15.2007Nokia's patent-licensing case against Qualcomm dropped by Dutch court
Last we heard from the seemingly endless Nokia / Qualcomm kvetch-fest, the former company was soliciting the ITC's help in barring US Qualcomm chip imports, but for those wishing on their lucky stars that this spat would simply vanish into the night, we've got marginally good news. Apparently, a trio of judges in a Dutch court ruled that it didn't have jurisdiction to rule on the phone maker's claims outside of The Netherlands, thus, the patent-licensing case against Qualcomm was dismissed. Aside from claiming that its "jurisdiction was limited," the court also stated that Nokia's gripe was "too broad to give a reasoned decision." Of note, a German court also dismissed the case just last month on "similar grounds," but if you were counting on Nokia to just take the news in stride, we doubt you'll be pleased to hear that it's already "considering if it will appeal the decision."
Darren Murph11.14.2007
RIM sues LG over phone names, "black" and "berry" apparently not okay
RIM may be better known as a defendant than as a plaintiff in the courtroom, but Waterloo's finest have actually done a brisk business filing lawsuits over the past couple years. In late '06, RIM filed a complaint against Samsung for calling its i607 -- a phone suspiciously similar in appearance to RIM's QWERTY devices -- the BlackJack, though the two companies eventually came to an agreement that allowed the name to carry on. Knowing that RIM was playing hardball, Verizon approached RIM earlier this year and asked if it could slap "Blueberry" and "Black Cherry" on some of its LG wares; RIM rejected the request, so Verizon went ahead and used "Black Cherry" and "Strawberry" anyway (apparently Verizon's "request" was more of a notification than a request). Anyway, that whole ordeal has apparently worked RIM into a lather and it has requested the destruction -- yes, destruction -- of all LG phones with "berry," "black," or "pearl" in their names. Don't get us wrong, we don't really want to see millions of phones destroyed, but... well, we kind of do. Especially if they use a wood chipper or something.[Via Just Another Mobile Phone Blog]
Chris Ziegler11.09.2007
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.
Darren Murph11.07.2007
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.
Darren Murph11.02.2007
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.
Darren Murph10.31.2007
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).
Darren Murph10.25.2007
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.
Darren Murph10.24.2007NuVision 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.
Darren Murph10.23.2007
Court clears way for suit hating on T-Mobile's locking, ETF policies
Looks like someone doesn't want their free-on-contract handset too badly! The California Supreme Court has thrown down its seal of approval to proceed with a lawsuit challenging a couple basic principles of carrier subsidies -- locked handsets and early termination fees -- with T-Mobile begin named as the lucky defendant this time around. The carrier had previously tried to get the case thrown out (as all good corporate lawyers should) by pointing out that its contracts require customer disputes to be arbitrated rather than taken to court, but the plaintiff's legal team successfully argued that the claims they were bringing against T-Mobile weren't arbitrable. So help us out here: what does a "win" for the public good constitute in this case, court-compelled unlocks and penalty-free contract terminations or the continued availability of heavily-subsidized handsets? Is the prorated ETF a good compromise?
Chris Ziegler10.17.2007