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.
It may come as a surprise, but Microsoft owns a lot of patents used in Android devices. In 2011 after a dispute over licensing fees, the tech behemoth entered a cross-licensing agreement with Samsung, allowing the allies to share one another’s intellectual property at a cost. Today, Microsoft has filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force Samsung to hold up their end of the bargain.
After years of battling in courtrooms around the world, it appears Apple and Samsung may be starting to grow weary of litigation. In the latest sign of this, Apple has filed a motion to drop a cross-appeal against Samsung on a matter related to the first California case decided a couple years ago between the two companies. The motion, filed with the Court of Appeals, ends Apple’s attempt to secure a permanent injunction against Samsung over multi-touch functions.
Earlier this month Apple managed to prevail in a case against Samsung over some patent violations in smartphones. However, the jury took much of the wind out of Apple’s sails when it awarded the company only $119 million in damages, much less than the more than $2 billion Apple was seeking. Apple seems to think the relatively insignificant amount of damages awarded in court is sufficient to justify a sales ban on Samsung products based on a recent court filing.
Samsung attorney John Quinn had some sharp words for Apple in a recent interview after the latest round in the Apple v Samsung patent wars ended in a California courtroom. Apple managed to prevail in the case, obtaining a ruling in their favor in the amount of $119.6 million after it was determined Samsung had infringed on three of five patents that were the focus of the case. However, that was a far cry from the $2.2 billion in damages Apple sought, prompting many to conclude Samsung had effectively won this round. Quinn went on to say that Apple will never receive any money from this latest litigation once appeals are exhausted. He also predicted the last case that yielded Apple a $930 million judgement will eventually be resolved with little to no money actually paid. According to Quinn “They (Apple) have nothing to show for the hundreds of millions of dollars they’ve spent” and “years into Apple’s holy war on Android, they haven’t collected a nickel.”
The verdict on the latest case between Apple and Samsung is in, and the jury has partially ruled in Apple’s favor. According to their decision, Samsung infringed on just two of Apple’s patents out of the five in the suit. All of the devices in the lawsuit were found to infringe on the quick links patent, and some of the devices infringed on the infamous slide-to-unlock patent. However, Apple did find one device that was found to infringe, but they weren’t awarded damages for it, so the jury will meet again on Monday to make a decision there. In total, Apple was awarded $119.6 million in damages, which could go up slightly after the weekend. Not a bad reward, but it’s pretty small compared to the original $2.2 billion Apple thought they deserved.