Blog 18: Consolidates a few Google cases into one

Last week I wrote about Nokia suing Google and how the courts cut the amount of patents infringements for the case in half. While another case refused to add more cases to an already large portfolio of infringements. This week I will talk about the opposite, increasing the amount of infringement to a case by consolidating. Skyhook has two pending cases against Google that will be consolidated into one. The first case in 2010 was for patent infringement of location positioning software and for anti-competitive conduct. While the one in 2012 is another 9 patent infringements targeting Google maps ability to use geolocation and Wi-Fi.

 

One big down side for Skyhook in this case is that they will not go to court until 2014. It is amazing how a case that originally started in 2010 can take four years to be started. This is yet another example of the business trend of companies (especially Google) infringing on patents and not waiting for the consequences until the patent is actually worth something in the market. However, the time will come when Google will have to settle with Skyhook. This shows how big companies can just infringe on patents and not worry about the consequences until later.      

Blog 17: Sketching and Describing the Design of P&G's Mouthwash Bottle

Parent Patent

P&G is trying to patent an adaptation design of a mouthwash bottle. However, they are running into trouble because the person who patented the a new design on the bottle did not follow all of the rules. There are a few problems with the sketch of the new patent. The sketch added a trapezoidal region with dotted lines. Dotted lines is supposed to identify a region of the design that is unclaimed by another patent but already exists on the original design. However, P&G could not prove that the claimed trapezoidal region originally existed. Additionally, any new boundaries need to be correctly described in the brief, which this brief did not properly explain. The author continues to show where the written description for similar case had new lines that were not properly written in the brief. This additional error shows that the laws need to be more explicit in how to describe these new boundaries.    

Child Patent

Blog 16: Google and HTC Sued by Nokia for Tethering Infringement in ITC

Google and HTC are in court again trying to protect itself against an infringement case brought by Nokia. This time Nokia is trying to ban all Samsung devices as they may hold patented technology used in tethering. Tethering is the ability for someone to use their phone in order to set up a mobile Wi-Fi hotspot. In 1995, Nokia patented the capability of sending a data connection from a computer to set up a mobile device. At the time they did not even know how valuable the patent would be, so they did not bother setting up the patent in Europe. One argument Google is trying to claim that Nokia’s patent was only for using analogue devices, but now we are using 4G technology. Also, Google is trying claim that this patent is too broad and should therefore be thrown out. Apple and Blackberry have already settled this patent with Nokia, but Google is still fighting. Google seems like it will lose this case, and then they may have one more chance to prove that they are not infringing or their Samsung phones will be banned from importation.

Blog 15: Intellectual Property Ventures

Intellectual Ventures has a diverse portfolio of patents that they license out to companies from several industries. Licensing is their main source of revenue. However, Symantec, the popular computers based security system, does not see the need to respect three patents. So, Intellectual Ventures is suing Symantec for infringement. One interesting thing about this case is where all the patents originated. Intellectual Ventrues has acquired most of their patents from small tech companies that were shutting down, others from transferring company hands, and some from individuals who made the patent in their backyard. Intellectual Venures is very good at scouting for discounted patents.  They gather patents from different industries and companies in order to control many functions of one specific industry. I can imagine a company like this having extremely high profit margins and a lot of power.

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2013/03/intellectual-ventures-v-symantec.html 

Blog 14 - Judge denies additional claims Ericson Vs. Samsung

Ericson attempted to add 15 patents to its 130 claim portfolio against Samsung. These claims are on several of Samsung’s cellphones and tablets. However, the judge was worried about adding so many patents to a limited 15 month time frame for a case, so he rejected the addition patents. Most ITC judges are limited in time and try to reduce the amount of claims. Plus, most cases slash the amount of claims by majority or more. Plus, Erickson has recently been looked at suspiciously for filing claims that have hardly any basis. So, judges usually look at this unfavorably and it may affect their decisions in future cases. However, the judge for this case, Judge Shaw did not mention this when denying the additional 15 claims. This show how desperate companies are to get as much as they can out of these litigation cases. I can imagine the courts are seeing such high volume of complaints that they cannot handle so many claims.  

Blog 13 - Nokia Litigation - Google aids HTC

Nokia reduced the amount of patents it is asserting to 40 patents against HTC and  nine of those patents are through Nokia's company, ITC. Some infringements are on a calendar apparatus and a mobile terminal, which allows phones to stream movies and television. Google is acting as a intervenor with HTC’s fight against Nokia  through filing bland legal motions. Still, Nokia is getting impatient about Google and HTC’s unknown defensive stance. The author thinks that this case like 90% of patent litigation will be settled before trial. This is yet another example of Google siding with another company to defend another patent. Google seems to be having many strategic plans when it comes to patent litigation.  

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/03/nokia-drops-several-claims-of-one.html

Blog 12 - Comparing U.S Permanent Injunction to Germany's on Google Maps

Last blog I spoke about Nokia trying to change the direction of the U.S courts in order to make it easier to serve permanent injunctions, which means to completely stop business activities for the infringer's item. Comparatively, German courts already have the power for permanent injunctions. More specifically, in the U.S courts can use the demand for a product and its competitiveness as a reason not to stop the business, while Germany will stop any businesses if it infringes on a patent without its economic effect.  

German courts told Google Map's defenders to prepare for a permanent injunction. Microsoft is suing Google for infringing on a “big idea” patent created in 1996, which patents a computer systems ability to identify local items. This technology is used on Google maps in order to identify specific locations on the map. Even though Android, HTC, Samsung, and LG pay Microsoft to license this patent, Google says that they are not infringing on this patent. Now, the German court system thinks otherwise and is getting ready to stop Google maps. This is just one example of what could happen to businesses if permanent injunctions become more rampant in the U.S. Patents will become more valuable as they will have more power to stop businesses, and many other business decision will be affected.   

  

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/03/google-about-to-lose-patent-spat-with.html        

Nokia Showing Support for Permanent Injunctions - Blog 11

Patent Case

Nokia has lots of experience with patent litigation. It owns over 10,000 patents and had to protect these patents on many occasions. This includes settled patent instigation with Apple and Google. Plus, Nokia is attempting to have the courts be more responsive to patent holders needs, like themselves. This will in affect increase peoples’ ability to once again innovate and not worry about unprotected patents. Nokia will do this by increasing the courts ability to pass permanent injunctions, which is a complete stop of business activities for the patent infringers after a case is complete.

 Now Nokia is attempting to submit an ‘amicus brief’ (adding official testimony) with Apple and against Samsung. This case was ruled by Koh’s in mid-December, 2012 where apple won the patent infringement case against the Galaxy tab 10.1, Galaxy nexus smartphone, and others. However, judge Koh could not put forth a permanent injunction because in eBay v. MercExchange, and Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Mfg. Corp made it nearly impossible for permanent injunctions to be passed. Nokia is trying to prove that because of these cases the court has diverged from its point of order by taking into consideration demand for the product, which is not part of patent law. Nokia has a strong point and if passed will have major implication on innovation, the economy, and patent wars.   

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/03/nokia-files-amicus-brief-supporting.html

Copyright a Hyperlink!?

Scholars have brought up a copyright case to the Court of Justice of the European Union in order to make it illegal to share a link to a site that has copyrighted information and is therefore illegal to see. The case started when someone who wrote an article referenced another article and which shared from then on. The group of scholars are trying to sue the person for making illegal content open to the web. This case seems pretty hard to go towards the scholars sides, as this practice is so prominent and hard to blame copyright infringement on the person sharing the link. Plus, this case  can have tremendous implication for the internet at large in the future. Half of what is on the internet are links that are shared illegally. For example, every time someone search on Google, there is an illegal link (not approve by owner) that Google dug up from the internet at large. Plus, if someone downloads a torrent to watch music or movie then whoever shared that link can be sued for lots of money. This would have implications for everyone who owns a site or shares info on the internet as they would need permission to post everything. the internet would be a different place and because of that, then I thin a law like that would take a while to pass.  

http://torrentfreak.com/hyperlinking-is-not-copyright-infringement-scholars-say-130218/ 

Foreign Online Copyright Infringement

Nowadays, many people have pictures online that they do not want other people to see. These pictures can be easily moved from place to place and even used illegally for profit through promotion. However, this year The Trinidad and Tobago Copyright Collection Organisation (TTCO) attempted to stop people from sharing their Carnival picture on social sites in order to avoid some uncensored photos from going online. As usual, no one really listened to laws preventing individual from accessing copyright intellectual property. However, Facebook did take down many photos for people in Trinidad. 

People download movies, music, and books online even though they have a copyright, why should this be any different. The main reason that people are accessing illegal intellectual property online is because it is so convenient and no one really gets caught or in trouble. So the rewards highly outweigh the risks of getting caught. In many countries, current laws are outdated and do not deal with online intellectual property. So, Trinidad is bringing new laws to update the language on copyright infringement and hopefully this will increase  private sector investments in the country and room for the creation of intellectual property. 

http://guardian.co.tt/lifestyle/2013-02-24/copyright-inconvenient-truth