Randolph Divisions Inc. ("RDI" of Hawaii) and HEARPOD Inc. ("HI" of Nevada) have filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Apple that includes Unfair Competition and Dilution. The Plaintiffs claim that Apple's "EarPods" brand name has harmed their company's trademark.
The San Francisco District Court has revealed that THX have filed a patent infringement case against Apple. THX is a high-fidelity audio/visual reproduction standard for movie theaters, screening rooms, home theaters, computer speakers, gaming consoles, and car audio systems. The current THX Company was created in 2001 when it spun off from Lucasfilm Ltd. The lawsuit alleges that Apple's iDevices including the iMac infringe on their intellectual property.
According to a new report, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan granted the Justice Department's request to compel Apple's CEO Tim Cook to testify for four hours in the lawsuit, which accuses Apple of conspiring with five publishers to raise e-book prices. The government had argued Cook likely had relevant information about Apple's entry into the e-books market. It also said Cook likely had conversations related to e-books with former Apple CEO Steve Jobs, who died in 2011. Although Apple fought the request, Judge Cote stated during a teleconference with Apple's legal team that the death of Steve Jobs is one of the key reasons in ordering the deposition.
MAZ Encryption Technologies, a document security firm, has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple. The patent infringement lawsuit concerns Apple's iOS security system and architecture. After the discovery process, MAZ Encryption Technologies is claiming that the infringement was willful. In legal terms, "willful" opens the door for triple damages awarded to the Plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant, in this case Apple, is found guilty of the charges.
SmartPhone has filed their second patent infringement lawsuit against Apple in the last fifteen months. Their first patent infringement case claimed six counts of infringement and this current suit claims four new counts of infringement. Smartphone is associated with Acacia Research Corporation with licenses technology to the likes of LG Electronics, Microsoft, Samsung and others.
The US Patent and Trademark Office officially published a series of 34 newly granted patents for Apple Inc. today. In our third and final granted patent report of the day, we cover the mechanics behind Apple's fifth generation iPod nano and more importantly, a unique security latch for a possible future MacBook Pro that will include a pivotal and detachable camera. To top off today's report we provide you with a list of 26 other inventions that Apple received granted patents for.
It came to light this morning that Apple was sued by Tina King late on Wednesday for $75,000 in a personal injury/ product liability lawsuit. King alleges that her iPod touch blew up in her face while listening to her music. Her incurred medical costs were claimed to be a whopping $600. That's right, $600, which is about the cost of a Band-Aid these days at a local hospital or clinic. Yet that will somehow cost Apple $75,000 if it is found liable. The formal complaint was filed in Eastern Texas.
Elia Data of Texas has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple. The patent infringement lawsuit alleges that Apple infringed upon a 2001 patent titled "Method and system for secured transport and storage of data on a network." Elia claims that Apple's Remote Desktop, OS X Server, iCloud, iTunes and App Store services infringe upon various claims of their patent. It would appear on the surface that Elias Data is little more than a patent troll.
By now everyone knows that Paul Allen's IP firm "Interval Licensing" has sued most everyone in techland including Apple, AOL, eBay, Facebook, Google, Netflix, Yahoo and others. Today, Interval Licensing has filed a new patent infringement case against Apple in Seattle's District Court. Report Update 2:20 PM PT
In a new report posted this afternoon we find out that Apple only extended a provisional patent license to Nokia for a limited 'standstill' period. Yesterday Apple filed its opening brief in the appeal of Judge Lucy Koh's denial of a permanent injunction against multiple Samsung products. It finally became accessible over the Internet a couple of hours ago.
According to the Toronto Star, Apple was hit with another shareholder lawsuit today, a case that is similar to the court challenge that star hedge fund manager David Einhorn brought as part of his push to unlock the company's cash hoard. The new lawsuit, filed by an investor from Pennsylvania in U.S. District Court in New York, seeks to block Apple from moving forward with a Feb. 27 shareholder vote on two proxy proposals.
Although Apple's iPhone trademark is registered in the US, they've somehow lost some of their rights to the trademark in Brazil. Brazilian regulators have ruled that Apple does not have exclusive rights to use the "iPhone" trademark in the country. Although Apple will appeal the ruling, they had rightfully argued before the court that it should have been given full rights since Gradiente had not released a product using the iPhone name until December 2012.
Express Card Systems of Frisco Texas filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple late yesterday that has come to light this morning. The patent infringement lawsuit concerns Apple's "Cards" App. The company states that Apple is infringing two of their patents.
Late yesterday Greenlight Capital under Greenlight Entities launched a formal lawsuit against Apple over matters of securities. Greenlight is requesting that the courts force Apple to allow shareholders to vote on particular amendments without them being illegally bundled as they currently are. Our report covers what the court filing covers along with formal statements by both Greenlight and Apple.
It's being reported this morning that Apple and other online retailers did not break California law by requiring consumers to provide their address and phone numbers as a condition of accepting credit card payments, the state's high court ruled. In a split decision, the California Supreme Court said state privacy protections for credit cards do not apply to online purchases that are downloaded electronically.