Apple has come out on top in a legal battle that claimed iMessage was rigged to not deliver to Android phones.
Earlier this month it was revealed Samsung agreed to pay Apple over half a billion dollar settlement from their historic patent battle of a few years ago. Samsung said they reserved the right to claw back some of the payment if a planned appeal to the Supreme Court was successful, indicating the case would continue despite the payment. Today Samsung filed an appeal with the Supreme Court concerning how the court handled design patent violations in the Apple case.
The European Commission has formally filed charges, “Statements of Objections,” alleging chipmaker Qualcomm has violated EU rules designed to prevent anti-competitive activity. The claims allege Qualcomm paid a major customer to exclusively use its chipsets in their smartphones and that Qualcomm sold chipsets below cost for the express purpose of forcing a competitor out of the market.
In a new joint filing with the courts submitted by Samsung and Apple, Samsung has agreed to pay over half a billion dollars to Apple pursuant to the judgment against them in a patent dispute between the two companies. This “sort of” settlement comes nearly five years after Apple’s original complaint and several years after Apple succeeded at the trial court level. Thus far, Samsung had not paid a single penny on the original award that was over $1 billion, but now they have agreed to make a payment of $548 million, the current amount owed after a series of appeals and adjustments. Despite agreeing to this payment, Samsung thinks they are retaining the right to possibly get some of this money back at some time in the future, a point that Apple disagrees with.
Back in 2014, the European Union’s courts decided individuals covered by their jurisdiction had a right to not have some information about them show up in search results, the so-called “right to be forgotten.” Although action to protect individuals exercising this right applies to all search engines, by virtue of its size and having been a party to the original complaint, Google has been the primary recipient of attention regarding how this right will actually be implemented. To help the public understand the impact of the decision, Google has released a transparency report on search removals.
Sprint may be a large corporation with decades of experience in the business market, but that does not mean everything works like a well-oiled machine. The carrier has recently been hit with several actions that can be traced to sloppy attention to detail or, as the cynic may contend, an intentional effort to cut corners. The latest hit comes from the Federal Trade Commission which has proposed $2.95 million in civil penalties related to failure to give proper notices when customers were charged extra due to low credit scores. This comes in the same week that Sprint lost an appeal in the state of New York regarding a $300 million fine for not collecting taxes.
Earlier this year Jawbone filed a lawsuit against several former employees who left to join rival Fitbit. Jawbone’s lawsuit claims the former employees took confidential company information with them in a breach of their contract with Jawbone. A California superior court judge granted a preliminary injunction on Tuesday to Jawbone.
Lyft and Uber are more than business rivals, they are bitter rivals. That bitterness has taken a nasty turn as an Uber investigation into a breach of their driver database has escalated to accusations of corporate espionage. Uber says an IP address tied to Lyft CTO Chris Lambert has been identified as a source that accessed an Uber security key.
A new report out of China says the Ministry of Industry and Commerce has opened an investigation into whether Xiaomi illegally used the term “best” in advertising on its web site in violation of a new advertising law. The new law went into effect on September 1st and includes prohibitions on all sorts of advertising activity, including the use of superlatives like the word “best” in advertisements. Companies that are found to be in violation may face penalties starting at $31,000 USD.
On-demand food service apps GrubHub, DoorDash, and Caviar are all being sued with separate lawsuits in San Francisco. The lawsuits are over employee benefits, claiming the services failed to offer employee benefits while still treating the workers as full-time. Failing to cover things like reimbursements for gas, parking and phone data.
Samsung and Apple have been clashing heads in the courtroom for years, and while Apple tends to monetary damages from most of these cases, we’ve never actually seen any other manufacturers barred from using technical features that Apple is ruled to hold a valid patent on. That might change with this latest ruling, however.
Last month Samsung received some backing from major tech companies like Google, HP and Facebook in their ongoing patent lawsuit with Apple. The companies were hoping to help bolster Samsung’s case before the U.S. appellate court that too much emphasis was being placed on patents that constitute a tiny fraction of the whole when it comes to a smartphone. The argument is an important one to Samsung as they try to limit the damages owed to Apple that resulted from a court case in which it was ruled that Samsung had violated some of Apple’s patents. The appeals court has rejected this latest argument from Samsung.
A final ruling on the amount that Samsung owes to Apple is still pending before the district court. When Apple originally won the court case, they were awarded closet o $1 Billion in damages. Since then, Samsung has been whittling away at that amount through a series of appeals. The current potential payment owed sits at $548 million.
After users discovered Apple’s iMessage platform contained an alleged “bug” that prevented users from receiving some text messages after switching to an Android phone, some former Apple customers filed a lawsuit alleging Apple’s actions were illegal. Apple has been fighting off the claims, mostly in secret, even as they launched a tool to help customers make the transition from iPhones to Android smartphones. The stakes may have ratcheted up a bit recently as both Google and AT&T have filed motions with the federal courts to access materials being filed during the lawsuit’s discovery phase.
Google’s nose has been bloodied slightly with the news that Microsoft has emerged victorious with a court ruling in a case that has been dragging on since 2010. The ruling could result in a decrease in royalty payments paid by electronics manufacturers for patents pertaining to Wi-Fi and video downloads. The case was a tit-for-tat move on Motorola’s part because of the lawsuit that Microsoft filed a month before claiming Motorola infringed on several Microsoft patents in Android smartphones.