Hasta La Gadget!

Kixeye has filed a cross-complaint against Zynga in what has become a back and forth battle between the two companies. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of California, and comes after a lawsuit by Zynga against Kixeye. It all started when one of Zynga’s employees who worked on CityVille left for the now-suing company.

Zynga filed a complaint against its former employee Alan Patmore, who originally worked on CityVille and left the company for Kixeye, becoming Vice President of Product. According to Zynga, Patmore took with him 763 files, which included confidential designs. The company also alleges that Kixeye was aware of the file theft and ultimately accessed the data.

Patmore has confessed to taking the documents specified by Zynga, while Kixeye admits to having accessed two of those files. The company states that neither of the two files contained Zynga trade secrets, however. For this reason, the cross-complaint seeks to have Zynga’s interference in its business relations and recruiting practices put to a stop.

Kixeye’s CEO Will Harbin offered this statement. “We will fight to our last breath to keep this predatory company from accessing our confidential information and best practices. We intend to defend ourselves from Zynga’s legal bullying for as long as it takes to reveal the truth – that Kixeye played no part in this.”

[via CNET]

Kixeye files cross-complaint against Zynga is written by Brittany Hillen & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Samsung has “no intention” to follow the example of HTC and work out a settlement with legal and consumer tech rival Apple, according to Samsung Electronics Head of Mobile J.K. Shin. He said so to reporters today, the AFP reports, when asked if Samsung might pursue a settlement similar to the 10-year cross-licensing agreement announced by Apple and HTC this past weekend.

Of course, Samsung has little to gain by proclaiming an interest in giving ground in its ongoing patent dispute with Apple, which spans 10 countries, multiple lawsuits and involves both hardware design and software patents. Certainly, Samsung could still be working behind the scenes to come up with such an arrangement, but it’s likely, given the circumstances, that Shin’s statements can be taken at face value in this case.

Consider that Apple and Samsung have made apparently little progress in trying to come together to settle this issue outside of court in the past. Apple reportedly offered Samsung a licensing deal for iPhone and iPad-related patents at around $30 to $40 per phone and tablet, back in 2010, a deal Samsung rejected. And top executives at the two companies have met repeatedly to try to find an arrangement that satisfies both parties, including twice this past year that we know of. Court orders have also been issued to try to force a resolution by getting the companies negotiating, and still, the two are at each other’s legal throats.

Shin also told reporters today that he expects Samsung’s Q4 results to be in line with Q3 with respect to smartphone sales, which basically means the company isn’t sweating its success. Last quarter, the Galaxy S3 became the world’s best-selling smartphone, dethroning Apple’s iPhone 4S as the single best-selling device. The strength of its consumer sales is why I argued Samsung has no strong motivation to arrange a deal like the one agreed to by HTC, and likewise, Apple doesn’t really have a good reason to settle unless it finds terms very agreeable to its position and goals with these lawsuits.

To many, securing your Battle.net account with one of the authenticators Blizzard offers is just the way the game is played. Folks have been using authenticators to secure their Battle.net accounts for years now, but one player has decided he’s had enough. His name is Benjamin Bell, and he’s the leading plaintiff in a new class action lawsuit brought against Blizzard.

According to IGN, Bell claims that Blizzard is “deceptively and unfairly” charging players extra for authenticators to secure their accounts, and he’d also like to see Blizzard stop requiring that players sign into Battle.net to play the studio’s games. Blizzard has required a Battle.net sign up for quite some time now, though Battle.net was around for years before it was turned into a required part of Blizzard’s games.

The suit also claims that Blizzard hasn’t done its part in making sure that Battle.net is secure. We can see the problems players have with physical authenticators – after all, Blizzard charges $6.50 for each one – but there’s also a smartphone authenticator app that’s free to use. In any case, Blizzard is going to fight this lawsuit, telling IGN, “This suit is without merit and filled with patently false information, and we will vigorously defend ourselves through the appropriate legal channels.”

We’re not really sure how this lawsuit is going to go, but we’re almost positive that if Bell comes out on top, the amount of money Blizzard players get will be negligible. Then again, it’s clear that this suit is more about getting Blizzard to change the way it operates Battle.net than it is about money. Keep it tuned here to SlashGear, as we’ll have more details for you once they surface.

Blizzard hit with lawsuit over Battle.net security is written by Eric Abent & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Ah, commercials. They’re convenient for those times you want to grab more snacks without missing any of your show, and maddening when you just want to watch TV without seemingly endless commercials. Dish Network offers two features via its Hopper Whole-Home DVR that allows users to record shows and skip commercials. Fox tried to block these features, but a judge has ruled in Dish’s favor.

PrimeTime Anytime allows subscribers to record prime time shows (hence its name), while AutoHop gives an option for skipping commercials on certain recordings. Fox requested a preliminary injection to block these two features, concerned about the effect it will have on advertising revenue. According to a statement published by Dish Network, District Judge Dolly Gee ultimately rejected Fox’s request.

Says the announcement, the block was rejected for several reasons, a few of which were related to copyright. The ruling stated that the use of PrimeTime Anytime does not infringe on Fox’s reproduction rights and that users cannot be held liable for infringement, and neither of the two features fall under unauthorized distribution. About AutoHop specifically, Judge Gee ruled that the feature doesn’t violate Dish and Fox’s 2010 RTC agreement’s Video-on-Demand provision, but that it does “likely violate” the RTC agreement in general. Fox, however, hasn’t provided any proof that it has been harmed by the feature.

Dish’s Executive Vice President and General Counsel R Stanton offered this statement. “Today’s ruling is a victory for common sense and customer choice … The ruling underscores the U.S. Supreme Court’s ‘Betamax’ decision, with the court confirming a consumer’s right to enjoy television as they want, when they want, including the reasonable right to skip commercials, if they so choose.”

[via Dish]

Judge rejects request to block Dish AutoHop and PrimeTime Anytime is written by Brittany Hillen & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Apple has negotiated a deal with European Union regulators that will result in the company avoiding a potential investigation on antitrust violations. However, in return, Apple is letting Amazon set their own prices for ebooks, which will most likely be lower than what Apple offers in their iBooks store.

Reuters is reporting that the European Union is about to accept the offer from Apple and four major book publishers: HarperCollins, Hachette Livre, Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, and Simon & Schuster. The proposal by these five companies was made back in September, and the EU is said to make a decision soon.

However, it probably won’t be until next month until we hear from the EU about their decision, but one source says that they will “likely accept the offer” from Apple and the publishers. The EU antitrust authority was investigating Apple’s ebook pricing, which some said prevented Amazon and other retailers from undercutting Apple’s prices.

However, this agreement is good news for Amazon, as well as consumers. Apple originally made a backroom deal with book publishers that would force Amazon to raise prices so that they wouldn’t hold a price advantage over Apple’s iBooks. However, this new deal with the EU will see Amazon ebook prices most likely going back down soon.

[via Reuters]

Apple avoids antitrust investigation by allowing Amazon to lower ebook prices is written by Craig Lloyd & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.