Grooveshark has been battling major record labels in recent years, losing a major ruling earlier this fall, over licensing issues related to its existing music service. Perhaps in an effort to mitigate damages in that case or to be prepared for a significant damages ruling, Grooveshark is launching a new online radio service that complies with record company licensing requirements. The new service, slated to launch in January, will run 99 cents per month and offer a no commercial experience.
The music and video streaming applications from Samsung are called Milk Music and Milk Video, respectively. The somewhat strange names, though, are not as unique as one would think. Multimedia company Milk Studios has filed a lawsuit against Samsung regarding trademark infringement. The complaint specifically goes after the music streaming service, claiming that Samsung did indeed know of Milk Studios’ existence.
Hit the break for more.
NVIDIA recently filed a lawsuit against Samsung and Qualcomm for violating seven of NVIDIA’s GPU patents. Samsung filed a counter lawsuit, of course, claiming that NVIDIA violated six patents, and Velocity, a small client of NVIDIA’s, violated eight patents. Samsung also claims that NVIDIA is using false advertising when they say the Tegra K1 CPU is the “world’s fastest mobile processor,” as Samsung believes the Note 4′s Exynos 5433 is faster.
NVIDIA has responded to this lawsuit, and it’s definitely putting Samsung in a negative light for dragging a much smaller company (Velocity) into the mix. The response accuses Samsung of suing Velocity to keep the lawsuit in Virgina where Velocity is based, as Virgina has a faster time to trial than most other places in the US. It makes sense for Samsung, but it feels like a cheap shot at the much smaller company.
In response to a lawsuit filed by Microsoft against Samsung accusing the Korean electronics giant of delaying patent payments, Samsung indicates in a new filing that possible antitrust issues created by Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia violate the patent licensing agreement.
There are people who have been waiting years to see this outcome. Between 2001 and 2006, Verizon was over-charging customers of its Family SharePlan. In two separate ways, Verizon was tacking on incorrect charges when customers should have been given free minutes or minutes at a lesser amount. The carrier has filed a settlement in New Jersey and the customers affected between the aforementioned years should be compensated. The value of Verizon’s proposed settlement is $64.3 million.
Google filed a request earlier this week seeking a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that pits the tech giant against another powerhouse in technology, Oracle. The case involves parts of Java that Oracle claims copyright over and believes Google has violated when building the Android operating system. While the dollar figure in dispute, $1 Billion, is sizable, Google is framing the question as key to the ability for tech companies to innovate.
Google has reached a settlement with the FTC agreeing to fully refund consumers charged for their children’s in-app purchases. The decision is hardly a surprise, considering Apple reached the same agreement in January, and Amazon did the same in July. The issue arises from Google’s requiring a password for purchases every 30 minutes and “blurring the lines” between real money purchases and virtual ones. The FTC’s issue arises from a few lawsuits filed by parents looking for retribution after giving their children free reign over their devices.
Get ready for another courtroom showdown between technology titans. NVIDIA has submitted formal complaints that allege patent infringement on the end of Qualcomm and Samsung. The seven patents included have to do with graphic processing units. NVIDIA claims it did reach out to Samsung to negotiate a licensing agreement for the parents; however, Samsung allegedly declined and went ahead with Qualcomm.
Here is the statement issued by NVIDIA’s David Shannon:
We made no progress. Samsung repeatedly said that this was mostly their suppliers’ problem.
Without licensing NVIDIA’s patented GPU technology, Samsung and Qualcomm have chosen to deploy our IP without proper compensation to us. This is inconsistent with our strategy to earn an appropriate return on our investment.
Devices that are said to be utilizing the disputed patents include the recent Galaxy Note 4, Galaxy Note Edge, and Galaxy S 5. Last year’s Galaxy S 4 and Galaxy Note 3 are also eligible. The Galaxy Tab S, Galaxy Note Pro, and range of Galaxy Tab tablets are all involved as well.
The formal complaints were submitted to the International Trade Commission and the United States District Court in Delaware.
As the lawsuits between Apple and Samsung continue to slowly wind down, Samsung has prevailed in avoiding an injunction that Apple was asking for in the latest episode. Earlier this year Apple prevailed in a patent lawsuit to the tune of $120 million. The injunction request was related to that lawsuit as Apple hoped to stop Samsung from selling products that used the patents in question.
The latest news from Apple and Samsung’s never-ending court battles has to do with Apple’s hefty legal fees. Apple wanted Samsung to pay for the $16 million in attorney fees that Apple spent during four trade dress claims against Samsung relating to the iPhone, iPad, and iPad 2.
Legally, Apple would have only been reimbursed if the court found the case “exceptional.” Since Judge Lucy Koh decided that some of Samsung’s patent infringement was based on function, it wasn’t an “exceptional” case, and refused to make Samsung pay for Apple’s fees. She did, however, release Apple’s $2.6 million bond that was pending from a sales ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1.