Google and Verizon announced on Tuesday that they have entered into a long-term patent cross-licensing agreement to “reduce the risk” of future litigation (via VentureBeat). Both companies expressed interest in reaching similar agreements with other large tech companies in an effort to thwart patent trolls that assert their patents in the courtroom in an effort to pad their pockets. Expand Expanding Close
Image via <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-05-01/tech-hubris-the-silicon-valley-antitrust-hiring-conspiracy#p2" target="_blank">Bloomberg</a>
A judge has rejected a settlement that was reached earlier this year between employees of Google, Intel, Apple, and Adobe and their respective companies, CNBC reported today. According to reports from the courtroom, Judge Lucy Koh ruled that the settlement was not high enough and should actually be $380 million.
The lawsuit was brought against the tech giants in question by current and former employees who believed (correctly) that their employers had created agreements to avoid attempting to hire engineers from one another. The idea was that if no competitors were making offers, each company was free to pay its employees whatever it wanted without having to worry about them jumping ship for a better offer.
Consumer rights group Hagens Berman has filed a new class-action lawsuit against Google alleging that the company’s rise to dominance in the search market was only driven by its inclusion as the default search option in Android, and that Google’s insistence that corporate Android licensees include the company’s first party software has artificially driven up the price of mobile phones.
To better explain exactly what the company is actually claiming, let’s break down a few quotes from the official press release on the lawsuit.
While the documents were never submitted in court, The Vergehas uncovered documents Apple was going to provide to highlight the work-arounds for their iPhone and iPad patents that Samsung could have utilized. The reason these were thought up is because Samsung claimed there was no way they could create their devices without the required elements of a smartphone or tablet today. Apple, however, said there were plenty of work arounds. For Samsung smartphones, Apple explained in the redacted documents:
Front surface that isn’t black.
Overall shape that isn’t rectangular, or doesn’t have rounded corners.
Display screens that aren’t centered on the front face and have substantial lateral borders.
Non-horizontal speaker slots.
Front surfaces with substantial adornment.
No front bezel at all.
Just this afternoon, a judge has decided to not grant the U.S. preliminary injunction Apple was pressing for against Samsung.
Claiming Samsung copied the iPad’s design, Apple has successfully achieved their mission in getting an Australian judge to block Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 from being sold in Australia, reportsSydney Morning Herald. Apple says that Samsung is infringing on two patents, and the judge ruled until changes are made the Galaxy Tab 10.1 can’t be sold from this point on.
Apple and Samsung have current litigation continuing over in Europe and the United States. Apple has already successfully blocked the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany and hopes to do so elsewhere.
Samsung won’t start addressing the core patent issue (screen patent) with the Galaxy Tab 10.1 quite yet. They want to prepare a proper defense against Apple. The fight continues.
You probably know by now that Google’s move to acquire Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion was seen as one specifically focused on acquiring their more than 17,000+ patents, many of which are thought to be key in protecting Android from other smartphone makers (Apple and Microsoft) in court. However, according to a report from Bloomberg, only 18 of those patents will be essential in fighting patent-infringement related cases against, namely, Apple.
According to CEO of ICAP Patent Brokerage Dean Becker (“global leader in intellectual property brokerage”) Google only needs a few of the 17000+ patents to protect it’s mobile IPs, he added:
“There are a lot of sweet patents in that portfolio…”- Dean Becker, ICAP Patent Brokerage
The patents cover a little bit of everything that we’ve come to expect from a smartphone; touch-screen gestures, antenna designs, location-based services, email,etc. Among some of the more notable patents that will certainly provide value when protecting Android include one from 2001 that details disabling a “touch sensitive” display that detects a user’s head in relation to the device to prevent accidental input (sound familiar?), another shows a feature that would allow users to control when their location data is sent over a network via GPS (lack of these types of features were recently the subject of debate at a senate judiciary hearing in May where Apple and Google were questioned on their practices in relation to user location data). Other noteworthy patents include one related to increasing data storage for users and others that detail features we see in most modern smartphones.
Motorola, even before being acquired by Google, was and still is involved in mobile related legal issues. Most recently Apple filed patent-infringement complaints with the ITC in October, and also sued the company in civil court for “a pattern of unfair, deceptive and anticompetitive conduct”. Claims which also mirror those of Microsoft. Motorola seems to be confident in their patents, however, by going after Apple in lawsuits on three separate occasions and filing their own complaint with the ITC. Expand Expanding Close
In January of 2010, Kodak sued Apple and RIM for infringing on their patent to preview photographs. The lawsuit is still going on, but today Wall Street Journal is reporting that Kodak is currently looking to sell 10% of their patent portfolio, which includes the patent Apple and RIM are bring sued for.
The 1,100 patents include patents covering capturing, storing, organizing and sharing digital image. WSJ credits the sale to Kodak’s loss in profit over the last two quarters.
Chief Executive Antonio Perez has been using Kodak’s intellectual property as a means of funding the company’s long and expensive transformation. In 2008, Mr. Perez put forth a goal to generate between $250 million and $350 million a year from Kodak’s patent portfolio.
Google is fresh off acquiring 1,000 patents from IBM and is likely still in a buying mood as it battles everyone from Oracle to Microsoft to Apple-by-proxy in the courts. Apple, who outbid Google for the Nortel patent portfolio is obviously on the offensive.
Corss-posted from 9to5Mac.
Manage push notifications
We would like to show you notifications for the latest news and updates.
You are subscribed to notifications
We would like to show you notifications for the latest news and updates.
