Hasta La Gadget!

Despite that billion dollar verdict, the legal battle between Samsung and Apple continues, and the most recent happening comes from the ITC. Following up on an ITC administrative law judge’s ruling late last year finding that Samsung had infringed a few of Apple’s patented designs and tech, the Commission made its final determination today and issued a limited exclusion order for some Samsung devices. In its decision, the Commission found no violations of any of Apple’s design patents, and only found that Samsung infringed a pair of patents — patent number 7,479,949 for touchscreen technology, and patent number 7,912,501 for audio jack I/O circuitry. In doing so, the Commission stated that devices with workarounds to the asserted patents that were found not to infringe by the ALJ are not subject to the exclusion order.

As a result, offending Samsung devices are scheduled to be banned from importation after a 60-day presidential review period. During those two months, the devices can still be sold, but unless Obama steps up for Samsung in the same way he did for Apple in a separate ITC case, we won’t be seeing them stateside again. While we don’t have an exact list of the affected devices, we do know that the devices at issue are older models like the Continuum, the Transform and the Galaxy S II. So, consumers won’t feel much of an impact from the ban, but we bet Apple’s legal team will have a much more enjoyable weekend as a result of this latest win.

Update: Samsung has issued a statement on the matter, which can be found after the break

Filed under: Cellphones, Tablets, Mobile, Apple, Samsung

Comments

Source: US ITC

Samsung got a big win in the International Trade Commission today, as the ITC handed down a final ruling finding that several models of AT&T-compatible iPhones and iPads infringe a Samsung patent, and issued an exclusion order preventing them from being imported, sold or distributed in the US. This final ruling comes months after an ALJ determined that Apple did not infringe any of Samsung’s IP, but clearly, the commission felt differently upon its review. This final determination holds that AT&T models of the iPhone 4, 3GS and 3G, plus AT&T iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G models infringe four claims of Samsung’s patent number 7,706,348 for encoding mobile communications.

The ITC reversed the ALJ’s ruling in part based upon modified construction of several key terms in the claims at issue, but upheld the prior decision regarding the other three patents Samsung asserted in the action. So, what does this mean for Apple? Not a tremendous amount, truthfully, as the newly banned devices are no longer Cupertino’s standard bearers and account for little of massive profits. Plus, Apple will, no doubt appeal the decision in court. Still, Samsung’s bound to feel pretty good about the victory, and every little bit helps in its quest to remain atop the smartphone heap, right?

Filed under: Apple, Samsung

Comments

Via: Reuters Tech (Twitter)

Source: ITC [PDF]

Samsung’s Galaxy S 4 isn’t even available yet, but already it’s being eyed for possible patent infringement. According to a report from Korea’s Yonhap News, LG suspects the S 4 might violate eye-tracking patents used in the Optimus G Pro. At the crux of this squabble is Samsung’s Smart Pause feature, which LG finds similar to its Smart Video technology. Chiefly, LG is focusing on a patent it applied for in 2009, though the company also plans to investigate whether Samsung infringed other eye-tracking patents dating back to 2005. So far, of course, Samsung has denied any wrongdoing, saying its eye-tracking tech is implemented differently and is based on proprietary technology. Given that the phone isn’t even out yet, we’ll leave it to LG to do its due diligence before accusing Samsung in court.

Filed under: Cellphones, Samsung, LG

Comments

Via: The Verge

Source: Yonhap News Agency

Google offered an olive branch to content producers when it promised to downrank pirate sites in its search results last summer. Really, the RIAA was looking for the whole tree; it just published a report claiming that Google’s technique hasn’t had any tangible impact. The agency argues that the millions of takedown requests didn’t lead to “significant” drops in rank for habitual violators. It further contends that many legitimate music sites only showed up in the top ten for about half of the searches, and were often kicked down the ladder by their bootleg counterparts. We’re reaching out to Google to get its side of the story, but the RIAA isn’t quite as patient: it’s demanding that Google “immediately” change the results and volunteers its help. While that’s a step forward from the music group’s previous accusatory stance, it doesn’t quite represent a two-way conversation on anti-piracy measures.

Filed under: Internet, Google

Comments

Via: The Verge

Source: RIAA

When the jury in Apple v. Samsung handed down its verdict on Friday, we watched Apple take a victory lap and heard Samsung warn of hampered competition, but one company remained conspicuously silent: Google. This weekend, though, Mountain View finally released a statement, insisting that while Samsung lost the trial, the ruling doesn’t actually implicate Android. “The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don’t relate to the core Android operating system,” the company said, noting that several of these patents are being revisited by the US Patent Office. Still, buried in that statement is an implicit acknowledgment that if Samsung can’t reverse the decision on appeal, innovation among Android devices might well be be stifled:

“The mobile industry is moving fast and all players – including newcomers – are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don’t want anything to limit that.”

Of course, Samsung has indeed said it intends to appeal (and an internal memo reported by CNET corroborates this), so it would seem that the proxy battle against Android is far from over, and the drone of legalese is sure to continue.

Filed under: Software, Mobile

Google on Apple v. Samsung: most infringed patents ‘don’t relate to the core Android operating system’ originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:12:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  BBC, All Things D, CNET  | Email this | Comments