For the most part, lawsuits involving Android OEMs have drastically died down since their peak in the early 2010s. A new lawsuit filed by Huawei against Samsung, however, alleges unlicensed use of cellular technology and software patents in smartphones.
Following a ruling by a European court that users have the “right to be forgotten” online, Google has launched a new web page that allows some users seeking a bit of privacy to have certain links removed from the company’s search results. The Mountain View search giant says it has already gotten thousands of takedown requests—and that’s before the form was even public (via Re/code).
The system isn’t automated, and Google says it will need to consider each request on a case-by-case basis to decide whether a certain link should be removed or left intact in the interest of public information. If that sounds a bit inefficient, that might be because it is. An introductory statement on the page calls it “an initial effort” which will undoubtedly be improved on over time:
After a recent ruling by the European Union Court of Justice, Google users have been flooding the company with requests to have unflattering links removed from its search engine. People ranging from politicians to sex offenders have already reached out to Google asking the software giant to purge their tainted web history.
The NSA’s $2b data centre in Bluffdale, Utah (source: businessweek.com)
Last week, we reported on a letter Google had sent to the U.S. government in which it asked for the release of national security request data. A week later, the company is now asking for the secretive Foreign Intelligence Court to lift a gag order, claiming that it has the constitutional right to clear its name after openly discussing government data requests.
A Google spokesperson says the company is asking the court to let it “publish aggregate numbers of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, separately,” because “lumping national security requests together with criminal requests – as some companies have been permitted to do – would be a backward step for our users.” Google is essentially asking for more leeway to describe its relationship with the government following the NSA leak two weeks ago. It wants to publish the total numbers of requests the court makes and which users are affected. The company says that the First Amendment gives it the right to disclose the information it is forced to hand over to the government.
The full statement from Google follows:
Expand
Expanding
Close
It’s litigation day as Apple and Samsung battle it out in courts the world over. In a two-day hearing which began this morning in Australia a judge asked for more time to study Apple’s claims, resulting in a brief Galaxy Tab 10.1 launch delay until the end of the month. Meanwhile, the first round of hearings is underway in The Hague over Samsung’s accusations that Apple’s iPad and iPhone infringe on Samsung’s wireless patents. The Korean company is seeking a ban on those products in The Netherlands.
Apple is represented by Rutger Kleemans (Freshfields) while Samsung’s legal counsels are headed by Bas Berghuis (Simmons & Simmons). Per information sourced from Webwerld editor Andreas Udo de Haes on Twitter and this Nu.nl report, Apple says Samsung is seeking a 2.4 percent charge of chip price for every patent. Apple has called those demands “simply excessive”. Sounds to us like Apple might have awoken the beast. Apple says because the two parties are still negotiating a licensing agreement of sorts, granting an injunction would be premature.
The Mac maker’s legal sharks stress Apple is buying its components from Intel and Infineon, hence no need for royalties to Samsung. Interestingly, Apple’s lawyers also explicitly stated that iOS devices sold in Europe do not use Qualcomm silicon found in CDMA versions of iPad and iPhone. Apple also said Samsung changed the license to Qualcomm to exclude Apple. In a nutshell, Apple’s argument is that Samsung’s technology and patents are already incorporated in Intel’s chipsets.
Samsung obviously disagrees and argues Apple has more than ten component suppliers and is obscuring them purposefully in order to make determining which components infringe on Samsung’s patents that much harder. Apple launched the iPhone in Holland back in 2008 without securing the necessary licenses, the lawyers for Samsung said. Apple denied Samsung’s claims and said Samsung, its parts supplier, wouldn’t demand a license until 2010 because Apple was an important customer. According to this Guardian article, the Apple account is worth fourth percent of Samsung’s total business…
Samsung has released an official media statement (via Gizmodo) regarding their ongoing legal spat with Apple related to their Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet. The company is quick to point out the court did not issue an “injunction against the sale of the GALAXY Tab 10.1” like many have reported, but rather Samsung voluntarily delayed the launch “pending the court’s decision in the week commencing September 26, 2011”.
It will definitely be interesting to see how this case plays out in the coming months. Especially with Samsung excepted to launch new variations of the Galaxy Tab at this year’s IFA. Full statement from Samsung below, if you’re interested:
Expand
Expanding
Close