Samsung suing LG, claims infringement on OLED technologies

by William Metzger on
tagged , , , ,

The Samsung-LG rivalry is back at it again. Samsung is retaliating for LG’s September lawsuit with a suit of their own. This time, Samsung is seeking to have seven patents granted to LG rendered invalid based upon previous infringement with some of their own. Samsung has long been producing Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED) displays, and many of their current gen Active-Matrix Organic Light-Emitting Diode displays (AMOLED) are being used is products around the world. This type of screen is immensely popular because of its ability to function without a backlight that many other kinds of displays require.

While both LG and Samsung produce similar displays. The function of them is quite different; LG uses their screens mainly for TV’s while Samsung focuses mainly upon mobile devices. Recently, with LG’s Optimus G line of phones and Samsung’s latest line of TV’s both companies have been stepping into each other’s territories. This dispute could potentially setting the boundary between these two markets for display technology and grant Samsung a strong monopoly in the mobile display market.

Source: Yonhap News

Apple and Samsung both allowed to add products to patent lawsuit

by Jared Peters on
tagged , , , , ,

Our two favorite legal teams from Samsung and Apple have both been given the green light on adding more products to their newest patent lawsuit. This is the lawsuit that includes the iPhone 5′s LTE and Apple’s addition of the Galaxy Note 10.1, US Galaxy S III, and Jelly Bean, in case you lost track. According to this ruling Samsung and Apple will both be allowed to add those new devices to the patent suit. To clarify, when Apple added Jelly Bean to the lawsuit, that’s limited exclusively to the software on Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus. Although since that is still technically Google software and not Samsung software, I’m just as confused as you are.

This lawsuit is set to take place in 2014 and targets the iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch, as well as 19 Samsung products. Realistically, neither of these companies will be promoting these same products come 2014, assuming no more products are added over time, but it’s always disappointing to see this constant litigation.

source: Bloomberg

CyanogenMod forced to change domain name and email address after alleged extortion attempt [Update: old domain is back]

by Alexon Enfiedjian on
tagged ,

Everyone’s favorite custom ROM maker, CyanogenMod, posted on their blog today that they will be changing their domain name and their email address due to an alleged extortion attempt by a once trusted member of their team. The new website will be temporarily hosted at www.cyanogenmod.org and the new email address has been changed to cmcyanogenmod@gmail.com

It is sad to see this type of corruption and greed in the typically friendly, team-oriented developer environment. CyanogenMod insists that it will be taking legal punitive action against the perpitrator, and will more than likely win the case. Yet we all know that in the end, everyone (including users) lose, since attention is taken away from the intensive task of developing ROMs and placed on unnecessary quarrels and disputes.

The issue shouldn’t interrupt users from downloading and installing thew new CM10 ROMS, however, which can be found at get.cm if you’re interested in that sort of thing. Just remember to flash at your own risk!

Update

And just like that the problem with the extortionist has been resolved peacefully and CyanogenMod’s site has been moved back to www.cyanogenmod.com. Cyanogen himself posted on twitter a few minutes ago that they have resolved the problem amicably. He encourages everyone to “just forget about this”.

source: CyanogenMod Blog
updated source: Twitter

UK court orders Apple to pay Samsung’s legal fees on an indemnity basis

by Sean Stewart on
tagged , , ,

Remember that pathetic attempt at an apology that Apple published a little over a week ago regarding Samsung and the Galaxy Tab? Apparently the UK courts didn’t find it too amusing and has ordered Apple to pay Samsung’s legal fees. While it’s not that rare that the loser in a UK case has to front the legal fees for the other party, slapping the “Indemnity” title to it certainly makes it stand out. In such instances the company will have to pay more under the Indemnity basis vs. the “Standard” basis.

I’m sure money won’t be a problem but the intent of the Indemnity tag is to humiliate Apple even more so than what they’ve already experienced. Don’t think they’ve been humiliated during the process? Just read their attempt at the apology. Kind of reminds you of the little kid you make apologize to the other kid, yet they don’t actually use the word “sorry.” Little embarrassed there, Apple? Or just arrogant? Well, that arrogance will now cost even more. The UK courts have not taken too well to that half-assed apology and called them on it even going so far as saying Apple was criticizing the courts decision in the “apology” verbiage – thus now the Indemnity basis. Only Apple would make something more out of a given situation. Any publicity is good publicity, right Apple?

source:  The Verge

HTC and Apple sign 10-year licensing deal to end patent disputes

by Jared Peters on
tagged , , ,

 

I think we can all agree the endless patent lawsuits aren’t good for consumers. Well, hopefully Apple and HTC have seen this light, as they confirmed they’ve settled their patent disputes and have entered a 10-year licensing deal to avoid more lawsuits. The CEOs of both companies made statements that they are pleased to have reached an agreement and are ready to continue innovation, not litigation.

Apple has certainly abused the patent system lately, but this is a step in the right direction. No amount of patents and lawsuits are going to force consumers to buy your products, and I’m sure Apple knows that. Now we should all just hope for this kind of agreement to happen with some other Android OEMs as well. Hit the press release after the break for more about the licensing deal. » Read the rest

Apple lands a patent for a rectangle with rounded corners

by Robert Nazarian on
tagged , ,

Oh my, our broken patent system is at it again. Yesterday Apple was awarded patent D670,286, which is a design patent pertaining to the iPad’s “ornamental” design. In a sense it’s a patent for a rectangle with rounded edges covering a “portable display device.” Before everyone screams foul, it remains to be seen if it will be worth anything to Apple.

Apple already has a design patent D504,889, and they successfully convinced Judge Lucy Koh that the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 should be banned based on it. Of course, in August, a jury didn’t find the Tab 10.1 infringed on that patent. Back then Samsung was quoted as saying it was “unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners.” Interestingly enough Apple now has the patent with this new ’286.

» Read the rest

Apple Offers Another Apology… Well Statement Highlighting Samsung’s Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe On The iPad

by Roy Alugbue on
tagged , , , , ,

 

Apple got away with giving a half-assed apology before online and it has done the same in print publications. After the courts telling it to give its attempt at an apology another try online, Apple went ahead and created another version of its apology in the famed UK print publication The Guardian. As you can see above, Apple clearly outlines the facts that Samsung’s Galaxy Tab did not infringe on the iPad— though Apple doesn’t say sorry anywhere in its statement. Naturally we’re all expecting to see a real apology—- you know the one where you actually say sorry— to appear soon, very soon on Apple’s website, so the courts and/or Sammy shouldn’t be too disgruntled we suppose.

source: Gizmodo UK

Apple told to rewrite its “Samsung did not copy” statement and keep it posted until mid-December

by Jared Peters on
tagged , ,

Remember when a UK court ordered Apple to post a notice on their UK website saying Samsung did not copy Apple’s designs? I’m sure it must have extremely tough for Apple to do that, but at least they complied, right? Well, maybe not. A UK court of appeals has criticized Apple for its choice of words, and the fact that the statement is hidden in a footer link on the website. That same court of appeals found that Apple is non-compliant with the court order.

» Read the rest

Apple Finally Says Samsung Didn’t Copy The iPad In The UK… But Samsung Actually Copied Apple In Other Courts Worldwide

by Roy Alugbue on
tagged , , , ,

 

If you recall: the UK courts recently found that Samsung actually didn’t infringe on various Apple iPad patents and subsequently ruled Apple had to give Samsung some satisfaction. Well Apple didn’t take too kindly of that and demonstrated its defiance to the courts’ decision and issued an arrogant apology. Apple’s legal team took some time to highlight the uniqueness of Apple products, while highlighting that Samsung’s products are “simply not as cool” as Apple products. In addition, Apple is quick to point out that all other major courts in the world recognized Samsung’s infringement of iPad, while the UK thought otherwise. As a result, Apple had this to say about the manner:

 

“So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple’s far more popular iPad.”

 

Talk about being completely defiant to UK law. So while Apple technically admits that Samsung didn’t infringe on its product, Apple also is quick to point out that well— Samsung did infringe per other courts. We’re not sure of how Samsung and/or the UK courts will react to Apple’s statement, but you really have to hand it to Apple— it won’t back down even if it’s wrong.

You can find the full statement from apple.com/uk when you hit the break.

» Read the rest

Apples says Justice Department is investigating Samsung’s use of patents

by Robert Nazarian on
tagged , ,

In a legal document filed earlier in the week, Apple says that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating Samsung on whether they misused some of its mobile-device patents that violate antitrust law. This stems from Apple accusing Samsung of using some of their patents improperly to block the sale of competitor’s products. I don’t claim to be a big patent expert, but I think this probably deals with FRAND, which means ”Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory”. Certain patents fall into this category and it means that owners of these patents must give a reasonable licencing deal. They usually deal with patents that are standard.

It looks like the investigation has been going on for several months and the European Commission announced they were doing a similar investigation in January. I also suspect that Samsung’s LTE patents will fall into this category.

source: nasdaq