Canon's U.S. court loss could cost it millions
When Canon Inc. was sued by a small, money-losing U.S. technology firm two years ago, the dispute was over a patent license that had cost the Japanese electronics giant a one-time payment of $5.6 million. But now that the lawsuit has caused Canon to lose the license, a fresh agreement with Texas-based Nano-Proprietary Inc. could be worth millions of dollars more.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/28/2007 10:34:00 PM] #
Recording industry urges students to stop downloads
The U.S. recording industry on Wednesday stepped up efforts to stop college students from downloading pirated music online and offered students a way to settle the disputes out of court. The Recording Industry Association of America, or RIAA, said it sent 400 letters to 13 U.S. universities advising of potential copyright infringement lawsuits against students who use their computer networks to swap songs they haven't paid for.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/28/2007 10:32:00 PM] #
Microsoft hit with $1.5 billion patent verdict
A federal jury in San Diego has ordered Microsoft to pay $1.5 billion to Alcatel-Lucent in a patent dispute over MP3 audio technology used in Windows. In its verdict, the jury assessed damages based on each Windows PC sold since May 2003. The case could have broader implications, should Alcatel-Lucent pursue claims against other companies that use the widespread MP3 technology.
CNET News
[posted @ 2/22/2007 08:31:00 PM] #
Apple, Cisco reach agreement on iPhone name
Network equipment maker Cisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc. said on Wednesday they had reached an agreement that allows both to use the "iPhone" name, after Cisco sued the iPod maker for using it for a new multimedia phone. In a joint statement, they said both companies are free to use the "iPhone" trademark on their products throughout the world, and each side will dismiss any pending actions regarding the trademark.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/21/2007 08:26:00 PM] #
High court skeptical of Microsoft patent ruling
U.S. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed doubts about whether Microsoft Corp. should be liable for infringing AT&T Inc. patents in Windows software sold overseas, a case that could determine the reach of American patents in foreign markets. Hearing arguments in the case, the justices sharply questioned AT&T's assertion that software code could be deemed a "component" of a computer, which would make overseas sales of the software an infringement under U.S. patent law.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/21/2007 08:25:00 PM] #
Microsoft and Ma Bell in Supreme Court duel
Corporate giants Microsoft and AT&T are getting set to duke it out before the U.S. Supreme Court next Wednesday (Feb. 21) in a case that will decide whether a company can be liable for infringement on a domestic patent abroad. Legal experts say the outcome could have widespread implications on both the software industry and the manner in which patent holders can protect their intellectual property.
CNNMoney.com
[posted @ 2/18/2007 03:01:00 PM] #
Judge weighs dismissal of Google trademark case
A U.S. judge is considering whether to dismiss a lawsuit against Google Inc. that argues it abuses trademarks by allowing rivals of a company to buy ads that appear when consumers search the Web for information on that company.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/16/2007 09:40:00 PM] #
Some lawmakers balk at bill on patent drugs
Some U.S. Senate Republicans voiced reservations on Thursday about a bill designed to stop drug makers from striking deals to restrict the introduction of cheaper generic drugs. Republicans joined Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in endorsing a bill that would crack down on drug patent settlements, but some Republican senators said they would not back final passage without substantial changes.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/15/2007 08:08:00 PM] #
Lawmakers gear up for patent system overhaul
After years of failed attempts at revamping what the high-tech industry decries as a broken U.S. patent system, a key House of Representatives panel is gearing up for yet another try.
CNET News
[posted @ 2/15/2007 07:56:00 PM] #
Princeton libraries join Google book-scan project
Princeton University has become the 12th major library system to join Google's ambitious, sometimes-controversial project to scan the world's great literary works and make them searchable over the Web. The Web search leader said on Monday Princeton had agreed to work with it to digitize about 1 million public domain books -- works no longer covered by copyright protections.
Reuters
[posted @ 2/05/2007 10:10:00 PM] #
After Long Dispute, Two Apples Work It Out
The long and winding road has come to an end for the Beatles, at least as far as the dispute over their Apple logo is concerned. Under the new agreement, Apple Inc. now owns all the trademarks related to “Apple” and will license certain trademarks back to Apple Corps Ltd., the London company founded by the Beatles in the late 1960s.
The New York Times
[posted @ 2/05/2007 09:59:00 PM] #
FTC sets limits on Rambus royalties
The Federal Trade Commission in a decision announced Monday substantially limited the size of royalties that memory chipmaker Rambus can charge for its DRAM technology. In 2002, the FTC charged Rambus with violating federal antitrust laws. The agency alleged Rambus engaged in deceit when it failed to disclose to JEDEC its patent plans for its high-speed memory chips.
CNET News
[posted @ 2/05/2007 09:56:00 PM] #
Viacom Tells YouTube: Hands Off
In a sign of the growing tension between old-line media and the new Internet behemoths, Viacom, the parent company of MTV and Comedy Central, demanded yesterday that YouTube, the video-sharing Web site owned by Google, remove more than 100,000 clips of its programming. As it has with the similar request from other companies, Google removed the Viacom clips from the YouTube site yesterday.
The New York Times
[posted @ 2/03/2007 08:58:00 PM] #
'Electric Slide' on slippery DMCA slope
The inventor of the "Electric Slide," an iconic dance created in 1976, is fighting back against what he believes are copyright violations and, more importantly, examples of bad dancing. Richard Silver, who filed the copyright for the Electric Slide in 2004, said on one of his Web pages that the DeGeneres Show had been putting up a legal fight as he tried to get compensation for a segment that aired in February 2006 in which actress Teri Hatcher and other dancers performed the popular wedding shuffle.
CNET News
[posted @ 2/03/2007 04:50:00 PM] #