Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It looks like Apple Inc. CEO Tim Cook isn't all that into thermonuclear war. Unlike Steve Jobs, who famously declared he'd wage all-out war against Google's Android operating system in the courts, Cook was known to be less fond of litigation, calling Apple's smartphone and tablet battles a “pain in the ass.” (See, “Slowly But Surely, Apple's Cook Emerges from Jobs' Shadow,” GigaOM, http://bit.ly/10hgZwY.)
The pain subsided ever so slightly last month, when Apple and HTC announced the settlement of their long-running dispute over smartphone patents. In a joint-statement, the two sides announced that they'd settled all outstanding litigation in federal court and the U.S. International Trade Commission and entered into a 10-year licensing agreement. See, “HTC and Apple Settle Patent Dispute,” Apple.com, http://bit.ly/WqyjR3. Both Cook and HTC CEO Peter Chou said the deal would allow them to put their energy into innovation rather than litigation.
The deal closes a chapter in the smartphone litigation saga that began in March 2010, when Apple sued HTC at the ITC and in U.S. district court in Delaware for allegedly infringing 10 iPhone-related patents. (See, In the Matter of Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices and Related Software, ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-__, http://bit.ly/SZCf5o). Two months later, HTC struck back with its own claims, accusing Apple of infringing three patents HTC had acquired from a patent troll called Saxon Innovations. See, “HTC Sues Apple, with Help from Troll,” Litigation Daily, http://bit.ly/TMWySk.
HTC then acquired nine Google patents and used them to file additional patent infringement claims against Apple (see, “HTC Ramps UP Patent Claims Against Apple, Thanks to Google's IP,” Litigation Daily, http://bit.ly/UatNSh), only to have ITC administrative judge Thomas Pender throw out those patents in June.
Details of the settlement are confidential, but industry analysts speculate that HTC will pay Apple a hefty licensing fee. According to Apple Insider, industry analyst Shaw Wu with Sterne Agee estimated that the royalty rate would be between $6 and $8 per HTC phone sold ' higher than the $5 rate HTC pays Microsoft. Based on HTC's sales figures, Wu predicted that Apple could make up to $280 million a year as a result of the licensing agreement. See, “HTC Settlement May Pay Apple $8 Per Phone, Act As Blueprint for Samsung & Motorola,” http://bit.ly/XWNCBx. Chou, however, disputed that estimate, according to a Nov. 20 Reuters report, saying $6-$8 estimates are “baseless and very, very wrong. It's an outrageous number, but I'm not going to comment on a specific number.” See, “HTC 'Happy' with Apple Settlement, Slams Media,” http://yhoo.it/UGP9oz.
It looks like
The pain subsided ever so slightly last month, when
The deal closes a chapter in the smartphone litigation saga that began in March 2010, when
HTC then acquired nine
Details of the settlement are confidential, but industry analysts speculate that HTC will pay
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.