In the long-running Apple v. Samsung dispute, which has now gone from the trial court to the Federal Circuit to an en banc opinion to the Supreme Court and then back to the Federal Circuit and finally back to the trial court, Judge Koh has granted a new trial on the issue of damages for…
Tag Archive for Apple
CustomPlay, Annotated
by Josh Landau •
Near the end of July, CustomPlay sued Apple and Amazon. CustomPlay is owned by Max Abecassis, who also owns Nissim Corp. (Nissim has a long history of involvement with the DVD standard and nearly as long of a history of forcing companies to license its DVD patents; this is hardly Abecassis’ first go at patent…
Saying Doesn’t Make It So—Why You Still Shouldn’t Listen To Qualcomm
by Josh Landau •
Last week, CCIA filed a statement on the public interest in Qualcomm v. Apple at the International Trade Commission (ITC), Qualcomm’s newest attempt to use patent law to reinforce their monopoly power over the baseband processor market. In a response filed yesterday, Qualcomm accused CCIA of partaking in a “coordinated effort aimed at misdirecting the…
If Qualcomm Wins At The ITC, We All Lose
by Josh Landau •
This afternoon, CCIA filed comments on the public interest in the Qualcomm v. Apple case pending at the International Trade Commission (ITC). Qualcomm sued Apple in the ITC as part of the large dispute between the two companies. (The dispute continues to grow, having recently added a case in Germany and suits and counter-suits between…
Apple v. Qualcomm – Double Dipping and Breaking Promises
by Josh Landau •
Back in January, Patent Progress wrote about lawsuits filed against Qualcomm by the FTC and by Apple. Today, Apple filed an amended complaint against Qualcomm, based in part on new law resulting from the Supreme Court’s Lexmark decision on patent exhaustion. A High Water Lexmark In Patent Exhaustion The Lexmark case, while important, is actually…
ContentGuard: Arguendo
by Josh Landau •
Today, we watched as a man stood in front of a panel and explained how the other side had behaved improperly and how the decisions they made were incorrect and contrary to applicable legal standards. I’m speaking, of course, of the ContentGuard oral arguments. What did you think I was talking about? Oral Argument at the…
ContentGuard: Validity and Privilege
by Josh Landau •
Monday I summarized the history of the ContentGuard cases, and yesterday I described the process of claim interpretation. Today, we’ll turn to an issue that we’ve focused on recently, patent validity. ContentGuard convinced the jury that the ContentGuard patents were valid—can they convince the Federal Circuit? Abstract Ideas We’ve written a lot about patents on…
ContentGuard: Defining A Patent Case
by Josh Landau •
Yesterday, I went through the history of the ContentGuard v. Apple and ContentGuard v. Google cases. I talked briefly about the Markman process; today, I’d like to go into more detail on what Markman is, how it works, how Markman affected the ContentGuard cases, and why it’s such an important issue in patent litigation in…
Previewing ContentGuard v. Apple and Google at the Federal Circuit
by Josh Landau •
This Thursday, June 8, the Federal Circuit will hold oral argument in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. and in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v Google, Inc. (The Google case also includes a number of major Android phone manufacturers, such as Samsung, HTC, and Motorola.) Both cases have roughly similar histories, and both appeals deal with…
Why No One Should Listen to Qualcomm About Patents
by Matt Levy •
Qualcomm is a major opponent, perhaps the strongest opponent, of patent litigation reform. It’s becoming pretty obvious why. A few weeks ago, the Korean Fair Trade Commission went after Qualcomm for its anti-competitive licensing practices. This time, it’s the U.S. Federal Trade Commission going after Qualcomm for its licensing practices. I wrote about the KFTC…