Yesterday, a Northern California jury announced their verdict in one of the most highly anticipated decisions of the high technology era: Samsung must pay Apple $1.05 billion in damages for patent infringement.
In that case, Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., both companies alleged numerous patent infringements by the other company. The jury’s verdict clearly indicates that it believed Samsung, not Apple, was the in the wrong here. So what happens next?
H-W Technology LC is suing Apple and 31 other companies for alleged patent infringement. It is not the first time this nearly unknown company has sued technology companies. The complaint alleges that the 32 companies violated Patent Number 7,525,955, which is described as “Internet protocol (IP) phone with search and advertising capability.”
The case was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in late March of last year. On July 27, 2012, the judge issued an order severing the complaint against Apple, finding that the company was improperly joined as a defendant. Instead of dismissing the claim altogether, as Apple requested, the judge transferred the complaint against Apple to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Other Resources:
The J.M. Smucker Company is mad as hell at Lodsys, and the jam and jelly maker isn’t going to take the firm’s demands for patent licensing fees anymore.
Lodsys is a patent owner that routinely alleges that companies are violating patents in its IP portfolio that cover web commerce, information gathering, and product customization. Companies that don’t agree to Lodsys’s demands often find themselves in patent lawsuits. Companies like Apple and app developer start-ups.
But not Smucker’s. It sued first (Read the lawsuit below)
While Apple and Amazon have continued battling in court over its App Store trademark, Amazon launched it’s “Kindle Fire” tablet this week.
The move prompted Apple to quickly file an amended complaint in the case (see below).
Here is a rundown of September’s highest scoring lawyers on Justia Legal Answers, along with a look at which Onward blog and Facebook posts readers viewed the most.
Justia Legal Answers’ Top 10 Legal Answerers for September 2011
My first hands-on experience with a personal computer was when my parents brought home an Apple II Plus. That computer and its sibling, the Apple IIe, introduced our family to the unbounded world of word processing, spreadsheets and, of course, games. These computers also launched my lifelong appreciation of and affection for Apple products. From PowerBook to MacBook Pro, and iPod to iPhone and iPad, a pantheon of insanely great Apple products has delighted me over the years.
Comedians, satirists, and Fake Steve’s everywhere, take note: under California’s new anti-Internet impersonation law, you want to make sure that you show your intent to tickle your reader’s funny bones on the Web.
That’s because under California Penal Code Section 528.5, someone who “knowingly and without consent” uses the Internet to “credibly impersonate[] another actual person” with the intent of “harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Some high-profile personalities and companies in California could put the new law through its paces in court. Here’s why.
© 2024 Justia
