Andy Rubin has only just announced his much-anticipated new smartphone, but his company may already be in legal hot water over the infringement of intellectual property. It's been brought to our attention that Spigen, the US case and accessory maker, already has a trademark for the term "Essential" and has written to Rubin's organization to contest its use. The letter firmly compels Rubin's fledgling company to "cease and desist from any and all uses of marks including the term "Essential"." Read More
Remember when Apple was up in arms about Samsung swiping their look for the first generation of Galaxy phones and tablets? Prepare for a case of design patent infringement that makes that look pretty tame. Today Nikon issued a press release stating that it had won a preliminary sales and import injunction against Sakar International, a current licensee of the Polaroid brand name, for the Android-powered Polaroid iM1836. See if you can guess why.
Yup, that thing is a dead ringer for the Nikon J1, a high-end, compact, replaceable-lens camera that competes with the Micro 4/3 standard. From body shape to color choice to button placement, it's a pretty clear knockoff - even the plastic lip around the lens release button looks similar. Read More
On Monday of this week, Apollo - the default music player in Cyanogenmod - was released to the Play Store in both free and paid variants. As of yesterday, just four days after its release, both versions of the app have been pulled due to alleged copyright infringement.
Andrew Neal, the app's creator, took to his Google+ page to let users know what happened:
Hey, just to let those of you who noticed that Apollo and Apollo+ are no longer in the Play Store know, MusixMatch filed a complaint and had them removed for alleged copyright infringement due to the way that Apollo fetches lyrics.
Over at FOSSPatents, Florien Mueller has gotten his hands on a copy of a filing containing Apple's damages claim against Samsung in their much-publicized California lawsuit. The contents indicate that Apple is seeking $2 billion in unjust enrichment damages (the amount Samsung has wrongly profited infringing Apple's design patents), along with $500 million in lost profits. A smaller $25 million royalty for various technical patents like tap to zoom and overscroll bounce is included, but only in regard to a few products.
The design patents are the damages headliners because only design patents offer the option of seeking unjust enrichment as a remedy (there are various and good reasons for this). Read More
When you try to think of companies that have a motivation to sue over smartphone patents involving Android, Fujifilm may very well be close to the bottom of the list, but you'd be wrong. The company has recently filed a lawsuit against Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility for infringing four of its patents.
The brouhaha began back in April 2011 (for those counting, that's a solid four months before Google even announced its acquisition of the company). Fujifilm claims that several Motorola phones infringe on one or all of the following patents which include, in dramatically oversimplified terms for the layman:
Just a few days after the Galaxy Nexus was removed from the Play Store following an injunction in Apple's suit against Samsung. However, as of today, the flagship Android phone is available from the Play Store again. While customers can purchase the device, the site says it won't ship for 2-3 weeks. This is in contrast to the immediate availability the device had prior to the injunction.
Update: And now the site says that the Galaxy Nexus will ship in 1-2 weeks. We're unsure what caused the change, but the net effect is still largely the same: you can't get it immediately, but soon. Read More
If you just felt a disturbance in the internet, as if millions of Android users cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced, here's why: the Galaxy Nexus is no longer available via the Google Play Store. This comes after Apple won an injunction against the sale of Google's flagship device last week. As of now, the device is not allowed to be sold in the US which includes, but is obviously not limited to, online sales from Google.
At the moment, the site merely offers users the chance to sign up to be notified when the device will become available. Read More
In the tech world, it's almost impossible to launch a high-profile device without someone claiming you've infringed a patent somewhere. Today, it's Nokia's turn with the Nexus 7. The Finnish company has stated that it believes the Nexus 7 violates some of its standards-essential patents relating to WiFi. The announcement seems to be a more casual nod to Google and ASUS to simply fork over a bit of cash, akin to the Rob Schneider prompting Kevin for a tip in Home Alone 2*.
Said Nokia to the Inquirer:
"Nokia has more than 40 licensees, mainly for its standards essential patent portfolio, including most of the mobile device manufacturers.
We're hearing via The Verge that Judge William Alsup has just handed down his decision on the copyrightability of Oracle's 37 Java API's, asserted by Oracle as having been infringed by Google in the Android operating system. This is probably the most important issue of the entire case. While a jury decided that Google did infringe Oracle's APIs as asserted by Oracle, that decision hinged on the assumption that the APIs were in fact copyrightable in the way Oracle had insisted they were.
Alsup determined that Oracle's API's are not, in fact, copyrightable in their "sequence, structure, and organization," and the related infringement claims against Google have been dismissed. Read More
Google and Oracle have been going at it for weeks now over both patent and copyright infringement claims made by the latter company. At least one issue is settled, though, as the jury on the case has decided that Google did not infringe any of Oracle's patents with Android. This is only a small part of Oracle's assault on Google. The larger issue is on the matter of copyright infringement, but at least on the patent issue, Google seems to be in the clear.
It's been a long road to get here, as the jury has been debating the matter for at least a week. Read More