Hasta La Gadget!

The International Trade Commission has weighed in on one half of the ongoing Apple-Kodak legal saga, ruling in favor of the team from Rochester. In a decision handed down yesterday, ITC Judge Robert Rogers determined that Apple’s allegations of patent infringement are unfounded, adding that one of the company’s patents is invalid. At issue are two digital camera technologies owned by Apple. One allows a camera to process multiple photos at the same time, while the other enables users to simultaneously adjust an image’s balance, color and resolution. Apple claimed that Kodak illegally used these mechanisms in its Z-series, M-series, C-series, and Slice cameras, in addition to some video cameras. Judge Rogers clearly disagreed, though he won’t be able to publicly explain his reasoning until both sides have had enough time to review confidential documents. Rogers’ decision will also be subject to review by the full ITC, which is expected to issue a yea or nay on September 19th. A Kodak spokesman said the company is understandably “pleased” by the decision, but it won’t have much time to rest on its laurels. On May 23rd, the ITC will announce a decision in a patent lawsuit that Kodak filed against both Apple and RIM, way back in January 2010. Stay tuned.

ITC judge rules against Apple in patent infringement case, Kodak smiles originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 13 May 2011 08:46:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Reuters  | Email this | Comments

It’s easy to mock the little guy when he takes a handful of giant corporations to court. Such litigious overzealousness usually gets tangled up or tossed out altogether — Klausner Technologies, however, is laughing all the way to the bank, with a stellar track record taking on some of tech’s biggest names over the past few years. To date, the company has scored wins in visual voicemail patent battles with Apple, Google, Verizon, LG, and Vonage — the company also struck a deal with Sprint, though presumably with less teeth-pulling. This week, Klausner added four more big wins to the list, inking deals with Panasonic, Yahoo, Qwest Communications, and Avaya in the wake of suits against the tech firms. The company still has ongoing battles with RIM and Cisco that will hopefully stay civil. We’d hate to see someone send a visual voicemail they’d regret later.

Panasonic, Yahoo, more admit defeat, sign deal with Klausner originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:13:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Reuters  | Email this | Comments

At last, Barnes and Noble is defending itself against the Microsoft lawsuit filed back in March claiming that B&N’s Android-based “e-reader and tablet devices” are infringing upon Microsoft’s IP. A portfolio strengthened significantly thanks to that little Nokia partnership. We’re not going to pick apart B&N’s response in detail. However, we’d like to focus on this little nugget of FUD asserted by Barnes and Noble’s legal team:

On information and belief, Microsoft intends to take and has taken definite steps towards making competing operating systems such as the Android Operating System unusable and unattractive to both consumers and device manufacturers through exorbitant license fees and absurd licensing restrictions that bear no relation to the scope and subject matter of its own patents.

Grrrowel. But B&N does make a good point about Redmond’s intentions. Microsoft has been repeating the mantra that Android is not free for awhile now. In fact, Steve Ballmer told CNN just last year that, “there’s nothing free about android… there’s an intellectual property royalty due on that whether [Google] happens to charge for that software or not.” A tack Microsoft (and Apple) has been keen to pursue through litigation with Motorola and a licensing deal with HTC. And this is only the beginning. Android: free like a puppy. Relive Steve’s immortal words in the video after the break.

Continue reading Barnes & Noble says Microsoft trying to make Android ‘unusable and unattractive,’ has a point

Barnes & Noble says Microsoft trying to make Android ‘unusable and unattractive,’ has a point originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 28 Apr 2011 07:07:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink The Inquirer  |  Groklaw  | Email this | Comments

An East Texas jury recently awarded a relatively small computer firm patent troll a pretty hefty settlement (in you and me dollars) in a patent infringement suit that named Google, Yahoo, Amazon, AOL, and Myspace as defendants. The jury awarded Bedrock Computer Technologies LLC $5 million for a patent concerning the Linux kernel found in the software behind Google’s servers. The patent in question is described as a “method and apparatus for information storage and retrieval using a hashing technique with external chaining and on-the-fly removal of expired data.” It appears Google is the first of the defendants to face a judgement, but we have a feeling this decision might have set a precedent. Of course, no infringement suit would be complete without a healthy helping of appeals — and considering the decision came from a district court, we can almost guarantee this case is no exception. You didn’t expect the big guys to stay down for the count, did you?

Update: As it turns out, the plaintiff in question here, Bedrock Computer Technologies, is actually owned by David Garrod, a lawyer and patent reform activist. Ars Technica profiled Garrod following the initial suit, pointing to the clear contradiction between his trolling and reform efforts. What’s more, Bedrock sued Google and the rest of the defendants in June 2009. Just six months later, Bedrock was back in the courtroom, but this time it was on the receiving end. Red Hat, the company supplying the OS behind Google’s search engine services, was suing Bedrock for patent invalidity.

Google ordered to pay $5 million in Linux patent infringement suit (updated) originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:43:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Foss Patents  | Email this | Comments

So we all know that Apple’s suing Samsung alleging myriad IP infringements, but you may not know what all the fuss is about. On one hand, the lawsuit is surprising because Apple gets much of the goodies it needs to build its iconic iPhones, iPads, and Macs from Sammy, and common sense dictates that you don’t bite the hand that feeds you. On the other hand, however, folks in Cupertino don’t take too kindly to copycats, and while it’s hard to put a dollar value on the brand equity Apple currently enjoys, this lawsuit shows it’s valuable enough for Apple to risk upsetting its relationship with Samsung and jeopardizing its supply chain. Having given the court docs a good read, here’s our rundown of what’s going on.

According to Apple’s complaint, phones from Samsung (particularly the Galaxy S variety) and its Galaxy Tab are eroding the efficacy of Apple’s carefully crafted brand. That brand is built, in no small part, upon the trade dress (aka the appearance and packaging) of its iDevices and its trademarked iOS icons, and Apple has spent over two billion dollars on advertising from 2007-2010 to stake out a little space in everyone’s brain that associates the iPhone’s looks and its progeny’s derivative forms with Apple. It’s worked quite well too, as Apple revealed (for the first time) in its complaint that it has sold over 60 million iPod touches, 108 million iPhones, and 19 million iPads total. Problem is, Apple views the Galaxy devices, their TouchWiz UI, and packaging — with their Apple-esque appearance — as illegal infringers on its hard-earned mental real estate, and it’s suing Sammy to stop the squatting and pay for its IP trespassing ways.

Of course, Apple isn’t just dragging Samsung to court for cashing in on the iPhone image in our hearts and minds — Jobs and company have accused Sammy of infringing several of their patents, too. Apple asserts that TouchWiz and the Galaxy S infringe upon its iOS home screen and iPhone 3G design patents. Additionally, the complaint says Samsung has run afoul of several Apple utility patents for: the iOS instant messaging interface, the “bounce back” effect you get upon scrolling too far in a list or window, control and status widgets, UI status windows that disappear a set time after being opened, and scrolling and ellipse multi-touch gesture recognition. In light of these alleged mass IP infringements, Apple’s asking the court for preliminary and permanent injunctions to take Samsung’s Galaxy devices off the market, in addition to the usual request for punitives, triple damages and lost profits. We’ve already heard that Samsung will “respond strongly” to Apple’s show of legal force, but time will tell if Sammy’s strong response comes in, or out of court. Those looking for a full breakdown of Apple’s legal claims can hit the more coverage link below.

Apple sues Samsung: here’s the deal originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:02:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Co. [PDF]  | Email this | Comments