When Universities Patent Their Research

30 11 2017

A few months ago, a judge ordered Apple to pay the University of Wisconsin $506 million for infringing one of its tech patents. Last year, Carnegie-Mellon University won $750 million in a patent infringement lawsuit against Marvell Technology Group. With such big-money patent cases in the news, you might think that owning a patent can create a major windfall of profit for universities. While this has proven true for a handful of institutions, the truth is that most universities actually make little or no money from licensing the inventions they produce.

more

The content in this post was found at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/11/20/universities-patent-research/id=90200/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



ITC opens 337 investigation for potential patent infringement by Apple screen sharing technology

30 11 2017

The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced that it was investigating potential patent infringement committed by Cupertino, CA-based consumer tech giant Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)… Aqua Connect said that Apple gave the ACTS terminal server product its “full support” when released to industry praise in 2008. To attract enterprise and government customers, Apple worked closely with Aqua Connect on development and sales of its terminal server service. “In early 2011, however, Apple—-abruptly and without explanation—stopped cooperating with Aqua Connect,” Aqua Connects alleges. By July of that year, Apple released a macOS update known as “Lion” which included a Screen Sharing remote desktop and terminal server solution.

more

The content in this post was found at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/11/21/itc-337-investigation-patent-infringement-apple-screen-sharing/id=90325/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



Judge: EFF’s “Stupid Patent of the Month” clearly protected by Constitution

30 11 2017
A federal judge in California has ruled in favor of the Electronic Frontier Foundation after the organization was recently sued over its “Stupid Patent of the Month” blog posts. As a result, the advocacy group is not required to remove a recent post simply because an Australian patent entity (often called “trolls”) doesn’t like it.

The case began back in April 2017 when EFF countersued an Australian company that it previously dubbed as a “classic patent troll” in a June 2016 blog post entitled: “Stupid Patent of the Month: Storage Cabinets on a Computer.”

In 2016, that company, Global Equity Management (SA) Pty. Ltd. (GEMSA), managed to get an Australian court to order EFF to remove its post—but EFF did not comply. In January 2017, Pasha Mehr, an attorney representing GEMSA, further demanded that the article be removed and that EFF pay $750,000. EFF still left the post up and then sued regarding the Australian court’s injunction.

more

The content in this post was found at https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/eff-need-not-remove-stupid-patent-post-about-australian-troll-judge-finds/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



Supreme Court won’t hear Apple v. Samsung round two

6 11 2017
The colossal courtroom clash between Apple and Samsung over patents won’t be making a second appearance at the Supreme Court.

The two tech titans went at it in front of juries in San Jose over the course of two blockbuster trials, held in 2012 and 2014. Both times juries returned verdicts in favor of Apple—the first ordering Samsung to pay more than $1 billion in damages, the second ordering a payment of $120 million.

News today concerns the second verdict. In 2016, the $120 million verdict was thrown out entirely by a panel of judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears all patent appeals. The judges said that patents on Apple features like smartphone autocorrect and “slide to unlock” were invalid in light of prior art.

more

The content in this post was found at https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/supreme-court-wont-hear-apple-v-samsung-round-two/and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



ZeniMax sues Samsung over Gear VR tech

31 10 2017
After winning a $500 million judgement against Oculus over the development of the company’s virtual reality technology, id Software parent ZeniMax Media is now going after Oculus partner Samsung. In a federal lawsuit filed late last week in the Northern District of Texas, the company says that Samsung’s Gear VR headset, widely advertised as “powered by Oculus,” benefited from technology that was “misappropriated by Oculus” from ZeniMax under a non-disclosure agreement.

Much of the complaint reiterates arguments ZeniMax made in its initial lawsuit against Oculus: that Oculus founder Palmer Luckey would not have been able to develop his VR technology without proprietary information and help that id’s John Carmack gave “in violation of his employment agreement” and an NDA, that Carmack intentionally destroyed evidence to “cover his tracks,” and that code that ended up in the Oculus software was originally developed at ZeniMax.

But the new lawsuit extends the allegations to say that Carmack’s proprietary information was also key to letting Oculus “secretly develop a mobile software development kit (“Mobile SDK”) and related software for the Samsung Gear VR.” According to ZeniMax, this Mobile SDK uses ZeniMax’s trade secrets and copyrighted code, and it was continually developed despite a “cease-and-desist” letter sent during the original Oculus trial.

more

The content in this post was found at https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/05/zenimax-sues-samsung-over-gear-vr-tech/and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.