Earlier this month a European court created a new “right to be forgotten” for citizens living in the European Union covered by the court’s jurisdiction. This new right means users can request search engines suppress information that may be returned by a search query. After the ruling was issued, Google started to receive a flood of requests for application of the new right. Google indicated at the time that they would create an online mechanism for users to submit these requests. That process has debuted via a help request form accessed on Google support pages. » Read the rest
The Samsung vs. Apple battle is truly never going to end until one of the two companies agrees to leave the tech industry forever. But this time, the two sides were able to come to a mutual agreement…to meet at a mediation session before battling in court once again in March over smartphone patents.
The session will be attended by Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Oh-Hyun Kwon along with their in-house lawyers.
The past has been rough for these two companies, and don’t expect anything to clear up anytime soon either.
The battle between Apple and Samsung has been going on for quite some time now, and we already know that Apple won a significant case against Samsung regarding patent infringements earlier this year. Well, recently a redacted document from the court case made its way to the public, and in it we find Judge Pender’s recommendations for punitive action against Samsung. Let’s just say it’s not looking pretty for the Korean company. According to FOSS Patents, an blog dedicated to software patent suits, Judge Pender made the following recommendations:
Microsoft’s current dispute against Motorola Mobility in Germany has taken a turn as they have now dragged Google into the mix. In the past, companies have always taken Google’s Android vendors to court, but never Google themselves. Microsoft has taken that step as the patent in question defines a method for a mobile device to obtain a map from one database, call up resource information such as the location of a hotel from a second database, and overlay the two sets of data.
According to a Microsoft spokesperson, they decided to bring Google into the mix because ”It became necessary to add Google to this particular case because Motorola maintains that it lacks sufficient information about actions occurring on Google’s servers.”
In response, Google’s Deputy General Counsel Allen Lo said in an emailed statement: ”We want to focus on innovation, not litigation, but we’ll vigorously defend against any amended complaint Microsoft files.”
What do you guys think of Microsoft not just taking Motorola to court, but Google themselves as well?
Remember when Oracle attempted to sue Google due to “supposed” patent infringements that were coded into Android? Google came out on top in that case when the judge ruled in favor for the search giant. Shortly after, we reported that one of the conditions Judge Williams Alsup set for Oracle for filing the case against Google was that Oracle would have to provide for Google’s legal fees if they were to lose the case. We initially reported that the dollar amount could be as high as $300,000, but now it appears that Google thinks it’s much more than that and are now demanding upwards of a cool $4 million. According to Google, “$2.9 million was spent for organization of copied court-necessary documents, $143,341 for transcript services, and $986,978 for compensation of the court-appointed experts.”
Oracle is expected to contest the supposed $4 million that Google is seeking. Obviously, $4 million is just pocket change for the search giant, but I’m sure it’s the principle of it that Google is after. Perhaps it’s a message Google is sending to anyone else that even thinks about attempting to sue them.
A District Court in the Hague, Holland, has ruled that some of Apple’s older iPads (iPad 1 and iPad 2) and iPhones (3G, 3Gs, and 4) violate one of the Korean firm’s 3G patents. Today’s ruling regards European Patent EP1188269, which protects “Apparatus for encoding a transport format combination indicator for a communications system.” Also, for winning this case it seems as if Apple may have to ante up some cash towards Samsung’s way as compensation. Is this sweet justice? Honestly, it probably doesn’t matter. This is just pocket change for Apple and even with this loss, I can guarantee that it will not make Apple stop themselves from doing this again in the near future. I know us Android fans are getting tired of Apple constantly trying to stop both Samsung and HTC from continuing their Android success, but if you haven’t gotten used to it by now, you might as well start to. I don’t see this changing anytime soon.
If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. This invaluable proverb has been motivating children in the UK for over 200 years now and I was fairly certain that I’d never find a scenario where it doesn’t fit… until now.
In its eternal battle to ban pretty much everything ever invented that doesn’t have an Apple logo on it, Apple hauled Samsung through the US courts last summer with a view to banning the original Galaxy Tab 10.1. Apple’s bid didn’t prove fruitful on that occasion however news from Foss Patents surfaced today suggesting that Apple is back in for a second bite at the cherry and that perhaps this time it might just succeed.
Florian Muller from Foss Patents had the following to say on their website: “Apple’s motion is fairly likely to succeed. If and when it does, there will be formal U.S. bans in place against all three of the leading Android device makers. Also on Friday, the ITC ordered a U.S. import ban against Motorola’s Android-based devices (to the extent those infringe a particular Microsoft patent), and in December, the U.S. trade agency also banned HTC’s products that infringe a particular Apple patent — as a result, two HTC product rollouts just got delayed.”
With Apple and Samsung due in court later in the week with a view to attempting to put an end to this nonsense, this writer will certainly be hoping not to write another article on litigation any time soon. Seriously Apple; save the money for your R&D department, it needs it way more.
Source: Foss Patents
Remember how Apple tried to obtain a preliminary injunction against Samsung to stop them from selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 (and some phones) from being sold in the U.S.? If you’ll recall, Samsung won that battle as the district court denied Apple’s request, questioning the validity of a couple of Apple’s patents. The court couldn’t see how Apple would be “irreparably harmed” if Samsung were to continue selling its products.
Apple, of course, appealed that decision. And it looks like the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has granted Apple another chance at getting that injunction. Three of the four patents in dispute were upheld by the CAFC, but they found fault with the lower court’s ruling that Apple’s tablet design patent was potentially invalid.
Oh how different things could have been. What you’re looking at above is a prototype image of what Google had in mind for the first ever Android phone back in 2006. As the court battle between Google and Oracle wages on, these interesting little titbits are surfacing from the courtroom via some official documents that Google released. It’s definitely interesting to note that the early prototypes resemble a Blackberry far more than an iPhone, perhaps adding some substance to the argument that Google changed its strategy after the success of the original iPhone.
Another interesting story to surface is that Google intended to subsidise a $9.99 unlimited data plan in partnership with T-Mobile as part of the launch strategy. It’s fair to say that HTC’s G1 was certainly an improvement on the original design although I suspect one or two of us would bite Google’s hands off for an unlimited data plan for less than $10!
Would you have bought this back in 2008? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
source : Android and Me
Android security tends to be a popular subject of discussion when looking for an area to criticise Android. Whether it be the much maligned Face Unlock or long-standing Pattern Lock, many tech sites enjoy nitpicking at every available opportunity. There is however one major organisation who might just disagree with the naysayers, the FBI.
Dante Dears, a San Diego based pimp was recently released from prison after serving time for trafficking prostitutes. Dears immediately violated the term of his parole by owning a cell phone which informants claim he was using to continue his pimping remotely. Naturally the FBI seized the phone and it was then that the problems began.
Dears refused to unlock the phone so the FBI promptly sent it off to the Computer Forensics Lab. Technicians at the lab succeeded only in locking the phone after too many unsuccessful unlock attempts. The phone then prompted the technicians for Dears’ Google login details which , of course, he refused to hand over. At this point the FBI had little option but to head cap-in-hand to Google to request the information. A warrant was served that asked Google for the following information :
- The subscriber’s name, address, Social Security number, account login and password
- “All e-mail and personal contact list information on file for cellular telephone”
- The times and duration of every webpage visited
- All text messages sent and received from the phone, including photo and video messages
- Any e-mail addresses or instant messenger accounts used on the phone
- “Verbal and/or written instructions for overriding the ‘pattern lock’ installed on the” phone
- All search terms, Internet history, and GPS data that Google has stored for the phone
Google responded with the following statement : “Like all law-abiding companies, we comply with valid legal process. Whenever we receive a request we make sure it meets both the letter and spirit of the law before complying. If we believe a request is overly broad, we will seek to narrow it.”
How is it the phrase goes? “Pimpin’ ain’t easy”, well it seems that advances in mobile technology inadvertently made it a little easier. It goes without saying that TalkAndroid absolutely does not condone the behaviour of Dears although it is reassuring to know that the average Android owner is well protected. Perhaps the FBI will be hoping that the adoption of Ice Cream Sandwich brings an increase in Face Unlock usage, at least then they might be able to get into the phone with mugshot photos.
source : ars technica