Google cuts a deal over old Nortel Networks patents

Google's Android Lollipop statue

Remember the Rockstar Consortium? The group was formed by a handful of tech giants (including Apple, Microsoft, Ericsson and Sony) to buy a treasure trove of patents and promptly sue both Google and some Android partners, which promised one of the bigger legal battles in recent tech history. Well, it's not going to be as dramatic as first thought -- Google has agreed to settle its part of the lawsuit. The terms of the deal aren't available and will take a few weeks to hash out, but it's likely that Google is forking over some cash to Rockstar given that Cisco did the same earlier in November. It's also unclear if ASUS, HTC, Samsung and other manufacturers have reached their own settlements. However, it's hard to see them keeping up the fight for much longer when Google itself is out of the picture.

Filed under: , , , , , ,


Source: Reuters

iPhones found to infringe pager tech, Apple ordered to pay $23.6M in damages

iPhone 6 Plus (in hand 003)

Bloomberg is reporting this morning that Apple’s iPhone and other devices have been found to infringe half a dozen pager technology patents owned by a Texas company called Mobile Telecommunications Technologies LLC.

Six patents owned by Mobile Telecommunications Technologies are valid and infringed, a federal jury in Marshall, Texas, has found.

The iPhone maker was ordered to pay the Texas company $23.6 million in damages.... Read the rest of this post here

"iPhones found to infringe pager tech, Apple ordered to pay $23.6M in damages" is an article by
Make sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.

Samsung lawsuit claims that NVIDIA’s benchmarks are misleading

NVIDIA Shield Tablet

Samsung definitely isn't taking NVIDIA's first patent lawsuit lying down. The Korean tech firm has countersued NVIDIA not just for allegedly infringing on six patents, but for leading buyers astray with benchmarks for the Shield Tablet. NVIDIA is supposedly trying to "confuse customers" by claiming that the slate's Tegra K1 processor outpaces the Exynos 5433 chip in the Galaxy Note 4; regular benchmarks show that's not true, Samsung claims. The suit also accuses PC vendor Velocity Micro of violating two additional patents (for a total of eight), since NVIDIA's graphics cards play a heavy role in its lineup.

Filed under: , , , ,


Source: Law360 (registration required)

Law firm investigating CVS and Rite Aid for potential class action suit over Apple Pay

MasterCard (Apple Pay ads 001)

Law firm Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe has launched an antitrust investigation into CVS and Rite Aid over their decision to stop accepting Apple Pay in their retail stores. As noted by MacRumors, the firm, which specializes in class action lawsuits, made the announcement on their blog last night.

Attorneys for Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe say that the two retail chains may have violated anti-trust laws, and the situation has class action potential. “Consumers with phones that support Apple Pay may be able to participate in a class action to restore the service at CVS and Rite Aid retail stores.”... Read the rest of this post here

"Law firm investigating CVS and Rite Aid for potential class action suit over Apple Pay" is an article by
Make sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.

Samsung worries that its Microsoft royalty payments amount to collusion

Samsung ATIV S

Samsung was quick to cite the acquisition of Nokia as a reason for holding out on Microsoft's royalty payments, but there weren't many details. Just what had it spooked? Thanks to some new court filings, we now have a clearer sense of its motivations. Simply put, the Korean tech giant is worried about "charges of collusion" now that Microsoft is a direct competitor in the smartphone business. The patent deal requires that Samsung not only make Windows Phones, but hand over sensitive business details -- both big problems when Microsoft could use them to gain a competitive edge. Samsung already stopped handing over those trade secrets over jitters that American antitrust regulators would step in.

Filed under: , , ,


Source: Reuters

FTC drags AT&T to court over ‘deceptive and unfair’ throttling of unlimited data users

AT&T Chicago store (interior 001)

It’s sad that we’ve grown accustomed to greedy carriers and their unlimited data deals. Not only does unlimited service typically come with lots of strings attached, carriers have dumb excuses ready once folks realize their data speeds are being throttled.

Having decided not to let it slide, the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is now taking AT&T to court over what it called “deceptive and unfair data throttling” policy.

As announced on Twitter and via a media release, the FTC’s federal court complaint alleges that the Dallas, Texas headquartered firm in some cases reduced data speeds for unlimited customers by up to 90 percent while failing to explain in clear and concise manner why and when throttling would take place.

“AT&T promised its customers ‘unlimited’ data,” reads the complaint, “and in many instances, it has failed to deliver on that promise”.

“The issue here is simple: ‘unlimited’ means unlimited,” said FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez. AT&T’s other sin: the company avoided mentioning throttling to customers who were about to renew their unlimited contracts.... Read the rest of this post here

"FTC drags AT&T to court over ‘deceptive and unfair’ throttling of unlimited data users" is an article by
Make sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.

FTC sues AT&T over ‘deceptive’ mobile data throttling

AT&T retail store

If you felt that AT&T pulled a fast one by promising you unlimited mobile data only to throttle your service later on, you're not alone. The Federal Trade Commission has just sued the carrier for misleading grandfathered customers about the changes; allegedly, it's not doing enough to warn these subscribers that it heavily throttles their connections after they reach a data usage milestone. It's not really unlimited access if your service becomes so slow that music streaming and other common features don't work, the FTC says. Effectively, AT&T changed the terms of use for people who were still under contract, and didn't say much when customers renewed.

Filed under: , , ,


Source: FTC

Apple defeats $94 million patent infringement suit

courtroom gavel

Apple on Wednesday defeated a civil suit put forth by GPNE, a non-practicing patent holding company in Honolulu, that was seeking nearly $100 million in damages. The company alleged that three iPhone and iPad models infringed on its pager technology patents.

A jury in the US District Court of San Jose disagreed, and rejected all of patent infringement claims. Apple applauded the verdict, calling GPNE a “patent troll,” a term given to companies who acquire patents for the sole purpose of collecting licensing and lawsuit fees.... Read the rest of this post here

"Apple defeats $94 million patent infringement suit" is an article by
Make sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.

Microsoft sues Samsung for the interest on its $1 billion+ patent payment

Microsoft had over a billion reasons (per year) to pursue a patent licensing deal with Samsung back in 2011 over the latter's use of Android. That fact is laid bare by a lawsuit today over the interest on payments (based on the number of Android devices sold) that are supposed to flow from Korea to Redmond. Re/code posted the unsealed lawsuit this evening, showing how despite the existing deal, Microsoft's purchase of Nokia last year lead to Samsung holding up its payment for the second fiscal year of the deal, and then refusing to pay interest on it. All of that is according to Microsoft, which also claims Samsung is threatening to hold off on paying its end for the third year of the seven-year deal.

Filed under: , , ,


Source: Re/code, Microsoft

Appeals court tosses out VirnetX’s $368 million victory over Apple


The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit tossed out a verdict today handed down by a Texas jury in late 2012 that would’ve forced Apple to pay $368 million to patent holding firm VirnetX. The jury determined that Apple’s FaceTime feature infringed on on the firm’s intellectual property.

The Wall Street Journal reports this afternoon that the appeals court has ruled that the verdict was “tainted” by erroneous jury instructions in the case and therefore is invalid. It also held that some trial testimony from a VirnetX IP “expert” should have been completely excluded from the case.... Read the rest of this post here

"Appeals court tosses out VirnetX’s $368 million victory over Apple" is an article by
Make sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.