Facebook Connect Twitter Connect RSS Feeds
  • Brands
  • Search
  • Contact

Articles tagged with: patent infringement

Microsoft Asks Samsung To Pay $15 Fee Per Android Phone

Microsoft has recently demanded that Samsung Electronics pay $15 for each smartphone handset it makes based on Google’s Android operating system. Samsung is expected to counter at $10 in exchange for a deeper allegiance to the Microsoft giant (e.g. make more windows phones).

Samsung had no immediate comment to the press, but we will see how this smartphone license fee pans out. To say that politics are involved in any industry is a huge understatement.

Samsung Asks U.S. To Ban iPad, iPhone Imports

The filing, dated Tuesday, says Apple’s iPhone, iPod digital music player and iPad tablet infringe on five of Samsung’s patents involving telecommunications standards and user interface inventions.

Samsung also filed a new patent lawsuit against Apple in a Delaware federal court on Wednesday.

Apple Feels Harassed By Samsung

Just days after Nokia was declared the victor in a lawsuit that Apple started, claiming that Nokia had infringed on some of its patents, Apple is still in a dead heat with Samsung. In this lawsuit, Apple is accusing Samsung of harassment in its request to see the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 prototypes.

Apple believes that Samsung is just trying to get them back for when Apple demanded to see Samsung’s products (upcoming Galaxy) for investigation. Apple further claims that it will not reveal its prototypes as these are key company secrets that cannot risk being leaked, or even copied.

Microsoft Pays $290M For Patent Infringement

The U.S. Supreme court upheld a 2009 verdict that had ordered Microsoft to pay $290 million in fines because the computer giant infringed on a patent that was owned by Toronto-based company i4i. The U.S. Supreme court found that Microsoft stole the concept of an i4i-owned patent that allowed users to manipulate the architecture and content of a document.

Microsoft altered its application in 2010 when it filed for an appeal. After the ruling, Microsoft argued that the courts should not require such a high burden of proof for patent violations because it made it hard for the larger companies to defend themselves in such cases.