Cybersquatting, one of the more profitable forms of trolling, is nothing new to anyone familiar with the interwebs. In fact, it's often a source of some pretty funny disputes.
That gets us to today's story: a lot of people have noticed Google doesn't actually own GooglePlay.com (link goes to WhoIs.Net - not the actual page). Now, Google wants that page, and they've filed an ICANN dispute to get it.
It has become such a problem that the United States passed its own legislation to address the issue. The preferred method for dealing with these disputes, though, has been an arbitration body known as ICANN, whose decisions are binding around the world (mostly because they essentially control the Domain Name System). Read More
It seems Sprint just can't catch a break lately. After the LightSquared LTE fiasco (it seems eminently likely Sprint will be forking over $65 million and have to cancel the deal), this just seems a bit like kicking the company when it's already down. Comcast has filed suit in Pennsylvania against the nation's number-three carrier, and it's for patent infringement.
Namely, Comcast alleges that Sprint is violating patents it owns covering technologies like SMS/MMS, mobile broadband cards and hotspots, as well as certain traffic routing technologies (IP/MPLS). Here are some excerpts from the complaint regarding the patents:
- No. 7,684,391: Communications System for Delivering Multimedia Internet Protocol Packets Across Network Boundaries.
In a court filing last night demanding an early trial date for the ongoing Google v. Oracle patent litigation, Oracle claims that Android is now irreparably harming Java's market share in the mobile, TV, and tablet space. Oracle says that these are areas where Java "has traditionally been strong." News to us.
Last time I checked, cheap multimedia flip phones running Opera Mobile weren't exactly high on Google's target product list for Android, but maybe I missed the memo on that one. Also, please direct me to these Java-powered TVs and tablets, Oracle - the Amazon Kindle is not a tablet, it's an eReader. Read More
OK, before I even get into this post, let me be clear: this is based on old news. However, it was news that no one seemed to pick up at the time, and when we discovered it, we thought it was quite interesting.
If you're unfamiliar with Lodsys, let's start with a history lesson. They're better known as the shell corporation offspring of a company called Intellectual Ventures LLC, a patent clearinghouse owned by a group of, shall we say, enterprising individuals. Their purpose? Buy as many viable tech patents as possible, and force major corporations into licensing (paying royalties) deals when infringement on any of these patents, which is actively searched for, is discovered. Read More
Samsung just announced in a blog post today, that they have filed preliminary injunctions in the Tokyo District Court and in the New South Wales Registry to ban the sale of Apple's iPhone 4S in Japan and Australia, respectively. Additionally, in Japan, Samsung have also requested an injunction to bar the sale of the iPhone 4 and the iPad 2.
According to Samsung, the injunction request in Australia is premised on Apple infringing various patents relating to wireless telecommunications standards, specifically Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) and High Speed Packet Access (HSPA). In contrast, in Japan Samsung has filed on the basis of Apple infringing one HSPA standard-related patent and three user interface patents. Read More
Everyone's getting on the peace train, it seems. T-Mobile, in concert with Verizon's filing last week, submitted an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief to the Federal Court for the Northern District of California this morning in regard to the ongoing patent and trademark suit between Samsung and Apple. Its contents? Basically the same thing Verizon's said - that denying Americans their 4G Samsung devices just for some silly little patent infringement will hurt 4G deployment in the US and decrease access to high-speed mobile broadband. T-Mobile actually refers to Verizon's brief in their own document, basically saying "Yeah, whatever he said, too."
After T-Mobile's statement regarding the fact that it still doesn't have the iPhone earlier this week (as though customers needed a reminder), this brief is a pretty logical step for the company to take. Read More
If you've watched or read any of the major American news outlets today, you might have heard a solid 15 second mention about a little piece of legislation known as the America Invents Act. You probably heard that it brings the most sweeping changes to American patent law in the last half-century, and that it should ease the burden of patent filing for both inventors and the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office).
You also know patent litigation is a major part of life as an Android fan, so your interest was probably at least piqued by the passage of this bill. Read More
If you head over to FOSSPatents this morning, you'll find a rather lengthy article about Google's acquisition of Motorola that ends with the following conclusion:
Google bought MMI to prevent the worst for Google's strategy, not to make things better for everyone else.
In a way, the $12.5 billion price represents protection money. But not in the way most people seem to think.
This statement is obviously contrary to the heaps of coverage the Motorola-Google deal received from major news outlets, blogs, and Android enthusiasts. Us included. This deal was to protect Android from the evils of Apple and Microsoft, with patents. Read More
After Apple decided to sue HTC last month in Delaware for patent infringement, it seems the handset maker is preparing to put on a little bit of high-profile litigation of its own.
This morning, HTC filed a claim in the U.S. District Court in Delaware alleging three counts of patent infringement against Apple, seeking all the typical damages bells and whistles that makes it sound like the world as we know it is at stake. The lawsuit is a typical response in high-tech IP infringement cases, where both parties "posture" and square off to see who has the more robust patent portfolio. Read More
This morning, as part of the ongoing Samsung v Apple patent litigation, the German court responsible for imposing a ban on Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales in the EU has backpedaled, temporarily lifting the injunction enjoining Samsung from distributing its flagship tablet in the European Union.
Why? It appears the German court decided that it may lack the authority to enjoin Samsung's Korean parent corporation under the EU's regulations regarding international jurisdiction. Long story short, Samsung Korea can sell all the Tab 10.1's in Europe that it wants, for now, except in Germany. Samsung Germany, however, cannot sell anywhere in the EU (this part of the injunction remains enforced). Read More