June 21, 2011

FOSS Patents reports that the judge overseeing the Samsung vs. Apple case has ruled in Apple’s favor regarding Samsung’s request to examine Apple’s next-generation, high-profile mobile devices: the iPhone 5 and iPad 3. Although this is good news for Apple (and expected news), Apple might still have to wait on obtaining preliminary injunction against Samsung’s ability to sell their devices in question in the United States.

This possibility comes from this key line from the judge on the case:

Samsung is free to argue, for instance, that there is little likelihood of confusion because consumers will not encounter its products side-by-side with the iPhone 4 or iPad 2, but rather with Apple’s next generation iPhone and iPad. Similarly, as to proximity, Samsung is free to argue that because the iPhone 4 and iPhone 2 will soon be outmoded and reduced in price, they are not being sold (or very soon will not be sold) to the same class of purchasers who are likely to buy new Samsung products. By choosing to allege infringement only of its current products, Apple opens itself up to these arguments.

Essentially, Samsung can argue that they should not be banned from selling the devices in question in the United States (like the Nexus and Galaxy devices) as these devices – both tablets and smartphones – are currently up against the iPhone 4 and iPad 2. Samsung could argue that Apple’s next-generation devices will be different in appearance, resolving Apple’s argument that the appearance of their devices has been copied by Samsung. Apple, of course, will not reveal the design and features for unreleased products.

If Apple can present the iPhone 5 to the court and show that the alleged problem of “consumer confusion” is essentially the same as currently (in terms of similarities between the Galaxy handset and the iPhone 4), Apple’s motion for an injunction is no less likely to succeed (though it’s clear that Samsung would try to overstate any possible differences in design).

FOSS Patent’s Florian Mueller closes his report by noting that Apple would have the best chance in accomplishing injunction against Samsung if they only motion for injunction when the iPhone 5 arrives in September– or when Apple wants to show their next-generation smartphone to the court (which will likely never happen prior to the public reveal):

If Apple would rather avoid this kind of impression, it might want to proceed cautiously and wait with a preliminary injunction motion until the iPhone 5 can be shown, or present only a tablet-related motion in the very near term and a smartphone-related one a little later.

expand full story

August 25

AAPL: 103.74

0.62
Stock Chart

Germany’s top civil court today has ruled against Apple in a case pertaining to the company’s swipe-to-unlock input method. Judges in the case explained that swipe-to-unlock is not sophisticated enough to be awarded patent protection. This ruling falls in line with a similar ruling that favored Motorola back in 2013 (via Bloomberg).

expand full story

June 1

February 5

August 21, 2014

secret-brazil

Following a recent ruling that Apple would have ten days to remove the anonymous social app Secret from its Brazilian App Store, Apple has complied with the order. The justification for the removal, according to a source close to the situation, can be found in section 22.1 of the App Store Guidelines:

Apps must comply with all legal requirements in any location where they are made available to users. It is the developer’s obligation to understand and conform to all local laws

As noted by the judge, the Brazilian constitution prohibits anonymous freedom of expression, which essentially makes Secret and other apps like it illegal with that country.

Per Article 5, Section IV of the Constitution of Brazil:

expand full story

August 8, 2014

Men are silhouetted against a video screen with Apple and Samsung logos as he poses with Samsung S3 and Samsung S4 smartphones in this photo illustration taken in the central Bosnian town of Zenica

Steve Jobs famously declared back in 2010 that Android was a stolen product, and he was willing to “go thermonuclear war” in order to “destroy” it.

“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

Back in April, I suggested three reasons it might be time for Apple to settle its Android disputes and move on. The relatively small damages award in the most recent case (and which now looks set to be further reduced) provided a fourth reason not long after I wrote that piece. But I think the case today is even more compelling …  expand full story

August 5, 2014

Men pose with Samsung Galaxy S3 and iPhone 4 smartphones in photo illustration in Zenica

Samsung and Apple just announced that they have agreed to drop all patent suits against each other in countries outside the United States, Bloomberg reports. The two companies will drop suits against each other in Australia, Japan, South Korea, Germany, Netherlands, the U.K., France and Italy. This agreement does not include any licensing agreements, though. This has no effect on United States battles either.

In a joint statement, the two companies had the following to say:

expand full story

August 1, 2014

May 24, 2014

Based on the most recent verdict in Apple v. Samsung, Apple is attempting to seek a permanent injunction against any Samsung device that infringes upon its patents.

While this includes the devices that were at the center of the latest court case, it also includes “software or code capable of implementing any Infringing Feature, and/or any feature not more than colorably different therefrom,” which could be construed to mean current and even future devices.

expand full story

May 20, 2014

Samsung Galaxy S II and iPhone 4 (front, side)

A Dutch appeals court today upheld a 2011 decision that banned the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy S II and Galaxy Ace phones, as noted by Re/code. The devices in question were found to have infringed on Apple’s design in an earlier ruling and blocked from sale.

Apple’s original intent was to get an injunction against all Galaxy devices, but the company was forced to settle instead for just the two devices listed above.

Even though Apple and Google recently decided to settle their differences, thus halting the “thermonuclear warfare” instigated by former CEO Steve Jobs, there’s no indication that Apple plans to stop going after Samsung or other manufacturers directly any time soon. In fact, Samsung was recently found to have infringed on Apple’s design yet again with some of its newer devices and order to pay nearly $120 million in damages.

expand full story

April 1, 2014

March 31, 2014

Photo: Reuters

Photo: Reuters

Pieces in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal suggest that the real target of Apple’s second courtroom patent battle with Samsung may be Android.

Some features in Samsung devices that Apple objects to are part of Google’s Android operating system, by far the most popular mobile operating system worldwide, running on more than a billion devices made by many manufacturers. That means that if Apple wins, Google could have to make changes to critical Android features, and Samsung and other Android phone makers might have to modify the software on their phones …

Jury selection begins today for the second patent case between the two companies after mediation attempts failed. Apple is seeking around $2B in damages for five patents it alleges Samsung has violated, while Samsung is counter-claiming that Apple is in violation of two of its own patents.

expand full story

March 18, 2014

February 25, 2014

February 10, 2014

apple-ipad-event-ibooks

A motion by Apple to halt the operations of a court-appointed antitrust monitor has been rejected, the Wall Street Journal reports. The lawyer, Michael Bromwich, was appointed by the court to ensure the compliance Apple’s iBook platform with antitrust laws. Apple previously petitioned the court to have Bromwich removed from his post, believing that his $1,100/hour legal fees were leading him to take undue investigative steps solely for the purpose of overcharging the Cupertino company.

Bromwich was temporarily taken off of Apple’s case, but subsequently returned to continue his duties. Apple then accused Bromwich of going beyond his legal authority and requested once again that he be removed from the company’s case. Today the court ruled that Apple’s request would have resulted in Bromwich being unable to execute his legal duties, and thus rejected the injunction.

The full ruling is embedded below:

expand full story

November 13, 2013

apple-v-samsung

After a judge in March invalidated almost half of the $1B verdict Apple won in its patent infringement case against Samsung in August of 2012, another trial would have to take place to determine how much Samsung would actually owe. It still owes Apple the other approximately $600 million in damages pending an appeal, but today the two companies are in court for a retrial to determine how much of the other roughly $400 million in damages Samsung will be responsible for. CNET reports that Apple’s attorney today told the court it wants $380 million in damages from Samsung, slightly less than the original $410 million in vacated damages:

“We will hear a lot from Samsung, saying no one would have purchased Apple products,” McElhinny said. “But in its heart, Samsung knew it was a two-horse race.”

He pointed to an internal Samsung document as “conclusive evidence Apple lost sales because of Samsung.”

“In a fair fight, that money should have gone to Apple,” McElhinny said.

The $380 million number comes from Apple’s calculations of around $114 million in lost profits, $231 in Samsung’s profits, and $35 million in royalties. Apple says Samsung made around $3.5 billion revenue selling 10.7 million infringing devices. expand full story

October 22, 2013

Screen+Shot+2013-10-22+at+8.28.03+AM

With the launch of Mavericks imminent, a handful of major websites have begun supporting the Safari Push Notification feature. These sites include The New York Times, NBA.com and social network Pinterest. HTML 5 web notifications have been supported by all major browsers, including Safari, for a while. However, the HTML 5 native feature requires the page to be open for notifications to be sent, as noted by MacRumors.

Meanwhile, Safari Push Notifications mirror the user experience associated with native app push notifications. With user consent, a supporting website can send notifications to your Mac without the page (or even, Safari) being open. This is because this system uses Apple’s Push Notification Service servers — rather than the local client — to function. Because of this server-side integration, the utility of website notifications increases dramatically.

With major support already implemented by such big sites, it seems like this will be a big deal for end-users. More sites will undoubtedly roll out support in the coming days. For instance, CNN was used to demo the feature at WWDC but is yet to go live publicly. Mavericks is expected to launch by the end of the week. It is very likely Apple will confirm the OS’ launch date at its special media event later today. expand full story

August 27, 2013

August 2, 2013

June 25, 2013

Submit a Tip

cancel

Submitting a tip constitutes permission to publish and syndicate. Please view our tips policy or see all contact options.

Powered by WordPress.com VIP