Research In Motion (RIM) managed to escape from having to pay a hefty patent infringement fine when the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California overturned an earlier verdict that would have had the company pay $147.2 million in damages to Mformation, a software company that deals with mobile device management. According to the presiding judge, there wasn't enough evidence to support the jury's findings of patent infringement.
The patent dispute between Apple and Samsung isn't just an ugly affair, it's turning downright fugly. Samsung managed to tick off both Apple and U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh by sharing evidence with the press that was ruled inadmissible, specifically a set of PowerPoint slides showing Apple did to Sony what the company claims Samsung has done to them -- copying designs.
If you're into sports, then you know how maddening it can be to see the referees penalize teams like crazy in one game, and then swallow their whistles in the next. That makes it hard for players and coaches to decipher the rules, which is exactly how Samsung must be feeling right about now. Not only are different courts around the world issuing opposite rulings in Samsung's patent fight with Apple, at least one is also factoring in the size of Samsung's devices, or so it seems.
Nobody likes to eat crow, but what do you do when a judge in a court of law hands you plate full of it and orders you to shove it down your gullet? The answer to that question is forthcoming. Apple, which has been on a crusade to bury Samsung for allegedly copying the look and feel of its iPad and iPhone devices, was ordered by a U.K. judge to flip the script and take out ads stating Samsung is innocent.
Samsung is having a crummy week. After losing a court battle in which Apple was successfully able to convince an appeals court to ban sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the U.S., Samsung learned a day later that it would also have to pull its Galaxy Nexus smartphone from store shelves. Adding insult to injury, Samsung has just been denied a preliminary injunction against sales of said smartphones.
Motorola Mobility has won an injunction against several Microsoft properties in Germany, including Windows 7, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, and even the Xbox 360 game console. After initially postponing the ruling, Judge Dr. Holger Kircher of the Landgericht Mannheim (Mannheim Regional Court) issued his ruling on four of Motorola's complaints against Microsoft, ultimately awarding the mobile device maker an injunction against Microsoft on two patents.
The Pirate Bay (TPB) may soon need to get those “Low Orbit Server Station” (LOSS) drones it talked about in March airborne, for things aren’t looking all that bright on the ground for the world’s largest torrent site. The latest setback for TPB comes in the form of a UK High Court ruling directing five of the country’s largest internet service providers (ISPs) to block the popular torrent site. Hit the jump for more.
Former Goldman Sachs programmer Sergey Aleynikov is a free man after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York deemed that stealing source code isn't the same as stealing physical property, and therefore Aleynikov was wrongly charged under the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA). If Aleynikov is to be punished, it will have to be based on copyright law and other intellectual property (IP) legislation, the judge said. Let's retrace Aleynikov's steps.
A class action lawsuit has put the onus on GameStop, not videogame publishers, to warn buyers of used games that they will be unable to access certain downloadable content (DLC) and online features unless they pony up an additional $15 for an online pass. GameStop could have fought against the measure, but opted for a settlement that requires the world's largest games retailer to post warning signs on shelves where used games are sold in California stores, as well as online, for the next two years.
There's a good chance you overpaid for a computer monitor or notebook purchased between 1999 and 2006, the time frame in which several display makers were engaged in a price fixing scandal. All but one pleaded guilty and agreed to pay fines of several million dollars, some of which crept into the hundreds of millions. The lone standout? AU Optronics, which was found guilty by a U.S. court.