iPhone modem supplier Qualcomm is countersuing Apple in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, saying the Cupertino company could not have “built the incredible iPhone franchise” without its fundamental cellular technologies. The chip maker accused Apple of contributing “virtually nothing” to the development of core cellular technologies.
Apple has filed a complaint against Swatch in a Swiss court after the watch maker has used the slogan “Tick different” to promote its Bellamy quartz wristwatch with built-in NFC Visa payment technology. Apple argues that Swatch is unfairly using a grammatically incorrect slogan that bears too many similarities to its “Think Different” ad campaign.
Watson explains that Apple must prove that Swatch’s slogan prompts an association with Apple products in the minds of at least 50 percent of consumers.
The seemingly never-ending legal battle between Apple and Samsung went back to its roots as a federal appeals court said Tuesday that it was up to a district court to decide if there should be a damages retrial. According to CNET, the case will return to the San Jose, California court where the trials in the long-running patent dispute originally took place.
A new class action lawsuit alleges that Apple intentionally broke FaceTime on iOS 6 in order to push users towards iOS 7. The move rendered older hardware like iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s inoperable with the FaceTime service. AppleInsider reports that Apple wanted to save money on a pricey data services deal with the content delivery network Akamai.
Apple on Friday announced it’s suing iPhone modem supplier Qualcomm, which owns many wireless patents, “after years of disagreement over what constitutes a fair and reasonable royalty”. The suit argues Qualcomm withheld nearly $1 billion in payments it owes to Apple as retaliation because Apple cooperated with the Korea Fair Trade Commission. Last month, Korean regulators slapped Qualcomm with a $850 million fine over its patent-licensing practices.
Apple’s suit, filed in federal district court in the Southern District of California, accuses Qualcomm of charging royalties for technologies “they have nothing to do with.” Responding to the complaint, Qualcomm called Apple’s claims groundless and said they “misrepresented facts”.
Believe it or not, the longstanding Apple vs. Samsung patent spat over iPhone’s iconic design is now in its sixth year. During that time, Samsung was found guilty of infringing upon Apple’s patented smartphone design, including iPhone’s rectangular front face with rounded metal edges and a grid of colorful icons on a black screen.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reopened that lawsuit yesterday after a recommendation from the U.S. Supreme Court to determine how much Samsung should pay the Cupertino firm over copying iPhone’s look and feel, according to court documents uncovered by Law360.com.
iPhone app purchasers may sue Apple over allegations that it has monopolized the mobile app market by not allowing users to purchase them outside the App Store, reports Reuters. The decision comes from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and it revives a long-standing lawsuit regarding Apple’s iPhone app practices.
In 2012, a group of iPhone users filed to sue Apple, saying its App Store exclusivity was anticompetitive. Apple responded to the suit, saying that users purchase apps from developers, and it merely rents out the space. A lower court sided with the Cupertino company, and threw the case out, but today’s decision reverses the order.
Following a five-year fight over marketing manager David Lysgaard’s faulty iPhone 4 he bought in 2011 from Apple.com, the Glostrup District Court has ruled that Apple did violate the Danish Sale of Goods Act by giving the man a “remanufactured” device instead of the brand new phone he was entitled to in accordance with local law, Domstol.dk reported Friday. Apple’s warranty terms state that refurbs use either brand new parts or those that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability.
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in favor of Samsung in a dispute over damages related to Apple’s iPhone design, reports CNBC. The decision means that Samsung won’t be held liable for all $399 million awarded to Apple in a previous lower court ruling.
That amount is based on profits of 11 Samsung smartphones that were found guilty of infringing on Apple’s designs, but Samsung argued the penalty is disproportionate. It believes it should only be liable for profits from specific components, and the Court agreed.