Hasta La Gadget!

We usually associate Boston University with brain studies and bat-chasing UAVs; we’ll have to add technology patent lawsuits to the list. Following similar claims versus the likes of Amazon and Samsung, the university has sued Apple for allegedly infringing on a 1997 patent for making gallium nitride thin films used in semiconductors. The university wants both financial compensation (likely the real objective) and a ban on US sales of the purportedly offending iPad, iPhone 5 and MacBook Air. Neither side is commenting on the case, although we suspect that it will end with a whimper, not a bang. Like many big tech firms, Apple tends to fight patent lawsuits when it expects to win, and settle out of court when it doesn’t. We’d add that the patent expires in 2015 — a Boston University victory would have relatively little effect on Apple’s future.

Filed under: Cellphones, Laptops, Tablets, Apple

Comments

Via: AppleInsider

Source: Boston Herald

Sprint’s bid to dismiss a $300 million tax suit filed by New York’s attorney general has been denied by the state’s supreme court, according to Bloomberg. The judge in the case decided the claims “satisfactorily allege that Sprint knowingly submitted false monthly tax statements,” and that a hearing will take place later this month. The so-called whistle-blower lawsuit arose in 2011 after Sprint believed it could withhold up to 25 percent of the taxes it was supposed to collect on fixed-rate wireless contracts. For its part, the state claimed it illegally treated them as nontaxable, adding that operators like AT&T and Verizon “correctly paid” them. The carrier said it intended to file an appeal, adding that New Yorkers, “who already pay some of the highest wireless taxes in the country,” are being forced to “pay even more.” Of course, given the recent merger approval by shareholders, Sprint’s headache could soon become Softbank’s, too.

Filed under: Wireless, Sprint

Comments

Source: Bloomberg

Apple’s dedicated “in-app purchases litigation administrator” has had a busy time of it. According to CNET, he or she has been emailing updates to the 23 million parents involved in a long-running class action lawsuit over unauthorized in-app bills racked up by their kids in the days before disclaimers and repeated password requests. The emails say that individual claims for compensation can now be sent to Cupertino as per the terms of the original settlement back in February. Disputed purchases under $30 will qualify for a nominal $5 iTunes voucher, while bigger losses may be fully refunded in cash — but only those incurred within a maximum 45-day period. There’s a deadline of January 13th, 2014 for at least some types of claim, by which point Apple’s litigation administrator may well find themselves diverted to another urgent case.

Filed under: Cellphones, Tablets, Mobile, Apple

Comments

Source: CNET

Companies that prevail in patent lawsuits can’t relax until the inevitable appeal is over — just ask Motorola. Nintendo, however, can take a momentary break. A US Court of Appeals just upheld the company’s win over IA Labs, declaring that the Wii Balance Board doesn’t infringe on an IA Labs patent. While the ruling isn’t all that vital when the accessory is now a rarity at best, it puts IA Labs on the hook for Nintendo’s $236,000 attorney bill. It also sends a warning to other companies plotting similar legal assaults, although we’d still expect lawsuits when other patent holders are hitting paydirt.

Filed under: Gaming, Peripherals, Nintendo

Comments

Source: Nintendo

Sprint warned Clearwire in early June that it viewed Dish’s latest attempt to buy it as illegal, and now the carrier is following up with legal action. Big Yellow has just announced that its filed a lawsuit against Dish and its acquisition target in Delaware, as it believes the buyout would violate state law and the rights of shareholders and investors in both itself and Clearwire. The Now Network is asking the court to prevent the completion of the deal, rescind certain parts of the agreement and seek “declaratory, injunctive, compensatory and other relief.” In the outfit’s own words, the suit “details how DISH has repeatedly attempted to fool Clearwire’s shareholders into believing its proposal was actionable in an effort to acquire Clearwire’s spectrum and to obstruct Sprint’s transaction with Clearwire.” Stand back folks, the legal fireworks are just starting.

Filed under: Sprint

Comments

Source: Sprint