Apparently it's time for the French to deliver Apple's tit for Samsung's tat won in US courts last week. Sammy's request for an injunction against the sale of the iPhone 4S was rejected by a court in France, which called the reaction out of proportion with its claims of intellectual property theft.
Now, here's how the math worked out. Since each of the offending smartphones remained on sale after the verdict was rendered in August 2012, the court decided that each type of phone would get its own per-unit amount in damages. Those figures were then applied the number of each device sold after August 25, 2012.
Reading the tea leaves from a court hearing is a dangerous endeavor. But standing out from a hearing on Friday over net neutrality regulations were comments from an influential judge who seemed to indicate more comfort with the Federal Communications Commission‘s legal defense of the rules.The comments came from Judge David S.
The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the rationale behind a Massachusetts law barring stun guns. In an unsigned order, the eight-member court ruled that the Second Amendment and the high court's precedent on the topic were enough to question the legal reasoning behind the top court of Massachusetts backing the prosecution of a woman that they said unlawfully possessed the electric weapon for.
Today we're rounding up all the details regarding Apple's legal battle with the FBI over iPhone encryption. This includes the one-sentence filing made by attorneys representing Apple this week notifying the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California that their clients "formally object" to an order to break in to an encrypted iPhone. Today we make it simple.
Apple has just filed a legal response to the Justice Department's response to Apple's response to the court order on behalf of the Justice Department. That simplified yet still confusing chronology of legal filings only shows the circus surrounding the tussle between Apple and government agencies, specifically the FBI, over unlocking the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone.
As Reuters reports, the lawsuit documents, filed by the firm which owns his trademark and publicity rights worldwide, called Pelé IP Ownership LLC , also point to Samsung's use of a photo portraying a "modified bicycle or scissors-kick, perfected and famously used by Pelé" in its advertisement. ( Here's a picture , in case you've never seen Pelé's trademark move before.
It might be less than a fourth of the hefty sum it had to pay Apple last year, but even a $120 million reprieve is a big break for Samsung . But more than not having to pay that amount, the US Appeals Court ruled that Samsung didn't infringe on one of Apple's patents that Cupertino sued it for nearly 2 years ago.
It seems that Samsung has been busy with more than just figuring out how to get the S Pen unstuck when pushed in the opposite way. A USPTO filing, made in the third quarter last year, reveals one idea to turn that stylus into more than just an input stick. Because, after all, you won't be using it to watch a movie.
In a case unrelated but entirely relevant to the San Bernardino legal battle , a New York judge has just ruled that Apple cannot be forced to unlock an iPhone for the FBI under the All Writs Act, something George Washington himself had signed into law back in 1789. In this case, the matter revolves around an iPhone belonging to Jun Feng of Queens, New York.
The government asked Apple to help the FBI access the contents of the phone, later following up with a court order when Apple refused to cooperate. CEO Tim Cook took to Apple's site on Wednesday to voice his opposition. In an open letter , Cook says that the order "has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, reportedly will introduce legislation soon to criminalize a company’s refusal to aid decryption efforts as part of a governmental investigation. The news was first reported Thursday afternoon by the Wall Street Journal . Burr’s office did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment.
As expected, federal prosecutors in an iPhone unlocking case in New York have now asked a more senior judge, known as a district judge, to countermand a magistrate judge who ruled in Apple’s favor last week. Last week, US Magistrate Judge James Orenstein concluded that what the government was asking for went too far.
This is a crowdfunded project, and as such may not deliver what its creators initially promise. Most crowdfunding sites, like Kickstarter and Indiegogo, have policies about what happens to your money if the project fails to deliver on its goals, but choosing to back a project is inevitably a risk.
"Fingerprint evidence -– unlike a password -– is physical evidence that can be compelled with a court order, overriding the objections of an accused or the next of kin of an accused," Andrea Matwyshyn, Northeastern University professor of law, told Forbes . There's already precedent for law enforcement to bypass screen locks with fingerprints.
In a short interview on NPR's Morning Edition on Friday , San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan saidthere is a "reasonably good chance that there is nothing of any value on the phone." Last week, Apple CEO Tim Cook reiterated the company’s firm commitment to privacy and its resolve to fight a new court order issued earlier this month.
Apple said Friday that it won't go to court to demand the US Federal Bureau of Investigation to inform the gadget maker how the feds broke into the phone of Syed Farook, who along with his wife killed 14 people in a San Bernardino County office building in December.
US government officials from the FBI director down have said repeatedly that the FBI-Apple legal brouhaha was just about a single phone —the seized iPhone used by Syed Farook, one of the San Bernardino shooters. And just last week, James Comey, the FBI director, said his fight with Apple wasn't about setting precedent ; rather, it wasabout battling terrorism.