Apple just won the latest round in one of its fights with Samsung over patent infringement, with a federal appeals court ruling that reinstates a $119.6 million patent-infringement verdict it scored.
Last year, a small hobbyist photo-sharing website decided to fight back against a lawsuit alleging that it infringed on a bizarre patent covering virtually the entire concept of online voting. The patent-holder plaintiff subsequently dropped the case after a heavy-hitting advocacy organization got involved, but the court has ordered the plaintiff to fork over thousands of dollars in legal fees for its “unreasonable” conduct. [More]
The ongoing patent battle between smartphone standouts Samsung and Apple will get its day before the Supreme Court this year, as the nation’s highest court has decided to hear arguments about one facet of the long-simmering dispute. [More]
Do you remember Prodigy, the online service that had many a mid-1990s user surfing the Internet, in the early days of the World Wide Web? IBM sure does, considering it holds patents for that dinosaur of the technological age, and is accusing Groupon of infringing on two patents that grew out of Prodigy, as well as a few others, in a new lawsuit. [More]
Apple has won another round in the seemingly endless battle with Samsung over patents: a U.S. court has banned Samsung from selling certain smartphones that infringe on three patents held by its rival. [More]
We’ve seen lots of odd things at CES International over the years — live kangaroos, stormtroopers, boxing matches, Seth Rogen — but one thing we’ve never seen before is U.S. marshals seizing knockoff products for alleged patent infringement. [More]
With all those lumbersexuals and their bushy beards taking a big cut out of the razor business, it’s no surprise that competition is fierce. In an effort to protect its slice of the market, Gillette is suing online subscription razor service Dollar Shave Club for violation of intellectual property.
A few months after a jury ordered Apple to pay almost $533 million after finding that the iPhone giant had infringed on three patents held by a rival company, a judge has thrown out that award and ordered a new trial to determine damages in the case.
Patents are intended to protect the developers of specific concepts. That’s why you don’t see a patent for “thing that can treat diseases,” but for individual medicines and devices. Last summer, the Supreme Court confirmed you can’t simply patent a generic idea just because you apply it to a computer. But a small photo-sharing site is being sued for infringing on a patent that arguably covers a vast range of vote-for-your-favorite competitions. [More]
Whoever is on penny-counting duty at Samsung is probably shaking his or head quite thoroughly at the job ahead. A jury ruled yesterday that Samsung has to pay Apple $290,456,793 in additional damages for patent infringement, which is quite a pretty penny. And that’s still less than the $380 million Apple had asked for.
In the corporate method of waving your hand to tell the teacher the kid at the desk next to you has been peeking at its paper, Apple filed a lawsuit alleging Samsung copied the “look and feel” of its iPad and iPhone. It seems Samsung’s Android devices such as the Samsung Galaxy S 4G, Epic 4G and Nexus S drew too much inspiration from istuff for Apple’s liking.
Vonage’s appeal was rejected by a U.S. appeals court, and so troubled VOIP provider Vonage will have to pay $117.5 million to Verizon as punishment for infringing their patents. In addition, Vonage will be required to donate 2.5 million to charity. Ouch, ouch, ouch.