Nokia is attempting to enforce a similar arbitration order to that which was handed down by the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

Embattled handset manufacturers Nokia and RIM are now locked in a dispute with each other over patents in the US, Canada and UK. The two firms are fighting over intellectual property they have licensed to each other since 2003, which enables phones to connect to wifi networks.

Nokia is attempting to enforce a similar arbitration order to that which was handed down by the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce as part of the same dispute. The Swedish arbitrator ruled that RIM is “not entitled to manufacture or sell products compatible with the WLAN standard” until it agrees on royalties with Nokia.

“RIM is liable to pay royalties and damages to Nokia for its … sales of any subscriber terminals (handsets or tablets) … compatible with the WLAN standard,” the arbitrator said in the ruling. “RIM has not contested that it manufactures and sells products using WLAN in accordance with Nokia’s WLAN patents.”

According to Nokia, a cross-license agreement was reached with RIM for standards-essential cellular patents in 2003 and was amended in 2008.

“In 2011, RIM sought arbitration, arguing that the license extended beyond cellular essentials,” Nokia said in a statement. “In November 2012, the arbitration tribunal ruled against RIM. It found that RIM was in breach of contract.”

“RIM and its US subsidiary nevertheless continue to violate the award and breach the underlying agreement. In order to enforce the Tribunal’s ruling, we have now filed actions in the US, UK and Canada with the aim of ending RIM’s breach of contract.”

Ericsson claims that Samsung refused to sign a license agreement on FRAND terms, despite two years of negotiations

As if facing legal action over patents from fellow handset manufacturers, such as Apple, was not enough, Korean firm Samsung is now facing action from the infrastructure market after Ericsson filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the company. The Swedish vendor claims that Samsung refused to sign a license agreement on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, despite two years of negotiations.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States, concerns both Ericsson’s patented technology that the vendor claims is essential to several networking standards and is used by Samsung’s products, as well as other Ericsson-patented inventions that are implemented in wireless and consumer electronics products.

Ericsson claimed that it has helped to create the mobile telephone system by contributing hundreds of its inventions to the standard in exchange for a fair royalty, adding that to date, the vendor has signed more than 100 license agreements with all major players in the industry.

Although Samsung previously licensed Ericsson’s patents in 2001 and renewed them in 2007, the Swedish firm claimed that those licenses have now expired.

“Ericsson has tried long and hard to amicably come to an agreement with Samsung and to sign a license agreement on FRAND terms. We have turned to litigation as a last resort,” said Kasim Alfalahi, chief intellectual property officer at Ericsson.

“The sharing of technology in the telecom industry is one of the main drivers behind this development. The telecom ecosystem builds on fair and reasonable terms that have created an attractive global mass market for mobility and broadband with Ericsson as a main contributor,” he added.

RIM has been ordered to pay $147.2m to Mformation for infringing upon its wireless MDM patents

Struggling Blackberry maker Research in Motion (RIM) has been ordered to pay $147.2m to mobile device management (MDM) solutions provider Mformation for infringing upon its wireless MDM patents.

The US Federal District Court of Northern California has ruled that RIM’s BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES) software, which is used by corporate enterprise customers to manage and secure their BlackBerry devices, infringed upon Mformation’s registered designs.

The $147.2m damages ordered were based on past sales of BES-connected BlackBerry smartphones in the US from late 2008, when the lawsuit was filed, through the trial date.

“Mformation created the mobile device management category in the late 1990s and was innovating in this area well before most of the market understood the fundamental importance of wireless mobility management,” said patent inventor and Mformation founder and CTO Rakesh Kushwaha.

“We ensured that our early innovations in device management were put through rigorous legal assessment by applying for patents on these innovations in the United States and abroad. Now these patented technologies are central to many critical mobile device management tasks being used by operators, service providers and enterprises around the world, including remote device configuration, lock/wipe and application management.”

The firm’s lead attorney, Amar Thakur of Foley & Lardner, LLP, added that the ruling showed that the legal system worked and said that “inventors everywhere should feel encouraged by the court’s decision.”

RIM said in a statement that it was disappointed by the outcome and is “evaluating all legal options”, and said that it is waiting for the trial judge to decide “certain legal issues” that may yet impact the verdict before deciding whether or not to appeal.

“RIM has worked hard for many years to independently develop its leading-edge BlackBerry technology and industry-leading intellectual property portfolio, and RIM does not believe that the Mformation patent in question is valid,” the Canadian firm said.

RIM’s recent struggles have been considerable and the firm recorded a net loss of $518m in its first fiscal quarter of 2013, which ended June 2, 2012. It has hired banks JP Morgan and RBC Capital to conduct a far-reaching strategic review of its business, and instructed them to look for partnerships for the business. RIM also announced plans earlier this year to cut a “significant” number of jobs.

Apple and Samsung's CEOs will hold talks to end their ongoing patent disputes

The CEOs of Apple and Samsung, Tim Cook and Choi Gee-sung, have agreed to hold settlement talks in a bid to resolve a patent lawsuit over smartphone and tablet technology, according to a court filing.

Apple began legal action against Samsung in the United States last year, accusing the firm of copying the design of the iPhone and iPad in its Galaxy line of mobile phones and tablets. Samsung then countersued Apple. US district judge Lucy Koh has now referred the companies to a San Francisco-based magistrate judge who will lead the talks aimed at ending the ongoing legal battle, which includes more than 20 cases in ten countries.

Apple has also failed in an attempt to dismiss a lawsuit by a group of American parents, led by attorney Garen Meguerian, over parental controls that had allowed children to buy additional services from iPhone apps. The group said that their children had downloaded games from the App Store but were then able to clock up substantial additional costs after buying additional services from within the App itself – which at the time did not require a password to authorise the sale if made within 15 minutes of the initial download.

“Apple requires its users to authenticate their accounts by entering a password prior to purchasing and/or downloading an app or buying game currency,” the court filing reads. “Until recently, however, once the password was entered, Apple permitted the user, even if a minor, to buy game currency for up to fifteen minutes without re-entering the password.”

Apple has now changed those settings, but the case will continue.

Meanwhile, Twitter has announced that it will begin a policy of not using patents as a tool to impede the innovation of others. The micro-blogging site is published a draft of its Innovator’s Patent Agreement (IPA) later this year. Adam Messinger, VP of engineering, explained that the IPA is a commitment from Twitter to its employees that patents can only be used for defensive purposes.

“We will not use the patents from employees’ inventions in offensive litigation without their permission. What’s more, this control flows with the patents, so if we sold them to others, they could only use them as the inventor intended,” he said.

He added that, typically, engineers and designers sign an agreement with their company that irrevocably gives that company any patents filed related to the employee’s work. The company then has control over the patents and can use them however they want, which may include selling them to others who can also use them however they want.

“With the IPA, employees can be assured that their patents will be used only as a shield rather than as a weapon,” said Messinger.

Apple has failed in its initial attempt to sue Motorola over patent infringement

The latest round of patent wars between smartphone players has seen Apple lose an interim ruling in the US, after the firm attempted to sue Motorola Mobility for infringing three of its patents.

The Administrative Law Judge in the US International Trade Commission (ITC) has ruled in favour of Motorola Mobility, after having found no violation for any of the three Apple patents listed in Apple’s suit.

Although the decision is yet to be ratified by the ITC, it is very rare for it not to uphold the Administrative Law Judge’s ruling. Apple, however, can appeal the preliminary ruling. The formal judgment to the case is expected to be given in May.

“We are pleased with today’s favourable outcome for Motorola Mobility,” said Scott Offer, senior vice president and general counsel of Motorola Mobility. “Motorola Mobility has worked hard over the years to develop technology and build an industry-leading intellectual property portfolio.”

Meanwhile, Apple has also publicly identified nearly all of its suppliers and invited an outside workplace conditions group to inspect them. The firm has come under scrutiny following reports of unethical practices and high rates of suicides at its suppliers, such as Foxconn.

Previously, the company had kept details of its supply chain secret, but it has now revealed a supplier responsibility report, which revealed that the company conducted 229 audits at different supplier factories over the past year, and found that employees at 93 factories had exceeded their “weekly working hour limits”, while there had been payment violations at 108 facilities and five factories had employed underage workers, though that was allegedly due to “insufficient controls to verify age or detect false documentation”.

Apple stated that it is working closely with its suppliers to ensure that these issues were resolved.

Apple

How does this article affect your perception of Apple? What is this?

Apple is 76.8% negative

Total votes: 104

2 12 104 4f5b816614 0

Google buys more patents from IBM

The ongoing patent war between smartphone players is showing no signs of abating in 2012, as it has been revealed that Google acquired more patents from IBM at the end of last year, some of which are likely to be used to protect its Android handset ecosystem.

The web giant had already acquired 1,023 patents from IBM in September last year, covering Java and wireless technology, in order to combat lawsuits from rivals such as Apple and Microsoft. The purchase brought Google’s war chest to more than 20,000 patents.

And now, according to the USPTO patent assignment database, the firm has acquired a further  188 granted patents and 29 published pending patent applications from IBM.

The patents cover a broad range of topics, from presentation software, email administration, video conferencing and instant messaging applications to server load balancing, network performance, blade servers and data caching. Two of the most notable patents acquired by Google relate to mobile advertising and a patent describing a computer integrated into a cordless phone.

2011 saw a host of patent suits dominate headlines in the mobile device market, as Apple tried and failed to secure a ban on Samsung’s the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia and a ban on Samsung’s touchscreen smartphones and tablets in the US. Samsung also tried and failed to block the iPhone 4S in France. However, in Germany, both Apple and Samsung could yet be successful in banning each other’s devices.

Most recently, Google suffered a double-blow as UK incumbent BT announced that it has taken legal action against it for alleged patent infringement, and the company’s takeover of Motorola Mobility – which it is purportedly acquiring to use the firm’s patents as ammunition in such disputes – hit a stumbling block as the European Commission (EC)  suspended its review of the merger late last year.

BT wades into patent war with its own lawsuit against Google

UK incumbent BT has taken legal action against Google for alleged patent infringement. The two firms have commenced legal proceedings in the US District Court of Delaware.

BT said that it is taking action due to Google’s “ongoing and pervasive” infringement of its patents, relating to technologies which underpin location-based services, navigation and guidance information and personalised access to services and content. 

It is seeking royalties and triple damages, as it claims that the patent infringement has been “willful and deliberate”. It also wants Google to pay for all of its legal costs.

“BT’s constant investment in innovation has seen it develop a large portfolio of patents which are valuable corporate assets,” the firm told Telecoms.com in an emailed statement.

The company said that it has a total worldwide portfolio of around 5,600 patents and applications and claims to have spent more than £5bn ($7.74bn) on research and development over the past five years. During the 2010-2011 financial year, BT filed for patent protection on 62 inventions.

“This is about protecting BT’s investment in its intellectual property rights and innovation. It is a well-considered claim and we believe there is a strong case of infringement,” the firm continued.

“We have invested heavily over the last twenty years, notably on mobility and related network services technologies, which BT recognised early on would revolutionise the way people communicate.”

Although the lawsuit is being held in the US, it is widely suspected that BT will take the complaint into other countries as well.

Google denies infringing upon BT’s patents and vowed to fight its corner in the courtroom.

“We believe these claims are without merit, and we will defend vigorously against them,” a Google spokesperson told Telecoms.com.

The news comes as yet another blow for Google and its Android ecosystem partners. The firm has been embroiled in legal disputes over patent infringements with Apple and Microsoft, and its takeover of Motorola Mobility – which is purportedly acquiring to use the firm’s patents as ammunition in such disputes – has hit a stumbling block as the European Commission (EC) has suspended its review of the merger last week.

Apple recently failed to secure a ban on a Samsung Android tablet – the Galaxy Tab 10.1 - in Australia, after an Australian High Court rejected an appeal to keep the device off shelves. It was also denied a preliminary injunction to block the sale of Samsung’s touchscreen smartphones and tablets in the US. Meanwhile, Motorola Mobility recently won a ruling in a German court against Apple that could see Apple’s iPad and iPhone devices banned in the country, although Samsung lost out in its attempts to ban sales of Apple’s iPhone 4S device in France.

Sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 are permitted in the US... For now...

Apple has been denied a preliminary injunction to block the sale of Samsung’s touchscreen smartphones and tablets in the US, after a judge in California ruled that the Korean manufacturer’s products would not severely impact Apple’s sales.

The ruling means that Samsung will be able to sell its devices in the US during the traditionally lucrative Christmas season.

US District Judge Lucy Koh in said in a court in San Jose, California: “It is not clear that an injunction on Samsung’s accused devices would prevent Apple from being irreparably harmed.”

Samsung responded to the ruling, with a spokesperson saying that the ruling “confirms our long-held view that Apple’s arguments lack merit. In particular, the court has recognised that Samsung has raised substantial questions about the validity of certain Apple design patents.”

Koh’s ruling only relates to an interim injunction that Apple had been seeking, and there is still a chance that Samsung could see an eventual ban imposed on its devices, when a full trial commences in July 2012. However, Samsung remains optimistic that it will come out victorious in the main trial as well.

“We are confident that we can demonstrate the distinctiveness of Samsung’s mobile devices when the case goes to trial next year,” the spokesperson added.

Apple has been seeking a ban on Samsung products – most aggressively on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet – in various countries across the world. It won its bid to ban sales of the device in Germany, where a Düsseldorf court upheld Apple’s preliminary injunction, which claims that Samsung had infringed its intellectual property and copied the iPad’s design.

Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hoffmann ruled that there was a “clear impression of similarity” between the Apple and the Samsung devices.

The ban could still be extended across the European Union, although Samsung has said that it will “actively and immediately” appeal the ruling and will likely go to a higher court, the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf.

Last week, Samsung was also given the green light to sell its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia, after a court ruled that the device does not infringe on Apple’s patents.

The Cupertino company was granted a temporary injunction that stopped Samsung from selling the device in the country, similar to the injunction it has secured in Germany. However, that has now been overturned.

Despite this, Apple does not plan to make life easy for the Korean manufacturer with reports suggesting that it is likely appeal this latest decision, which could stop Samsung from being able to capitalise on the Christmas sales period in Australia.

Earlier this year, Malik Saadi, principal analyst at Informa Telecoms & Media told Telecoms.com that such patent disputes are stifling innovation in the handset and connected devices markets.

“Initially, the goal of patenting was to protect innovation. Now, the target of patenting is to prevent innovation, because of this protectionism,” said Saadi. “That is really bad for the industry, when you see companies just buying patent rights to use them as legal battle against others – that really kills innovation.”

He added that intellectual property copyright ought to encourage more sharing and innovation, but instead, patenting is becoming purely a legal tool.

“It’s becoming a case that these giants are trying to monopolise innovation and giving a hard time to anyone who wants to innovate their own circle,” Saadi concluded.

Sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 have been banned in Australia

Apple has won an injunction to block the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 Android tablet in Australia.

The device was already temporarily banned pending the court ruling, and the ban has now been upheld until a full patent trial is held next year.

Samsung had initially offered to modify the software on the device to counteract the injunction, but Apple’s argument stated that the device also copies the design of its iPad and iPhone products.

“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging,” the company said. “This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”

Samsung had tried to appeal the decision to get its device in stores during the lucrative Christmas period, but Apple said it was concerned that if consumers bought the Galaxy Tab might, they may never choose to buy Apple products again.

Samsung responded with a statement saying it is disappointed with the ruling. “We will take all necessary measures including legal action in order to ensure our innovative products are available to consumers. This is a part of our ongoing legal proceeding against Apple’s claim. Samsung is also confident it can prove Apple’s violation of Samsung’s wireless technology patents through a cross claim filed on September 16, 2011 with the Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales.”

Samsung recently lost the rights to sell its Galaxy Tab in Germany, after Apple won an injunction to block the sale of the product, alleging that the device infringes patents held by Apple. The company is now seeking to block the sale of Apple’s iPhone 4S in several markets, including South Korea.

Samsung has been told it can no longer sell the Galaxy tablet in Germany

Apple has won a case in Germany to prohibit the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 device in the country.

A Düsseldorf court upheld the preliminary injunction secured by Apple, which claims that Samsung had infringed its intellectual property and copied the iPad.

Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hoffmann ruled that there was a “clear impression of similarity” between the Apple and the Samsung devices.

Apple declined to comment on the judgement, but Samsung wrote in a statement:

“We are disappointed with this ruling and believe it severely limits consumer choice in Germany.”

The company added that it will “actively and immediately” appeal the ruling and will likely go to a higher court, the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf.

Colin Fowler, associate at specialist IP law firm Rouse, said that the practical effect of the ruling will be limited to Germany, rather than the EU-wide ban – with the exception of the Netherlands – that Apple had initially secured.

“The skirmish over the injunction is important not just for Apple and Samsung, but also for other tablet manufacturers, as well as consumers, because it means the product stays off the market in Germany. Apple is reportedly now also pursuing the Galaxy Tab 7.7 so the dispute between the two companies appears to be escalating,” said Fowler.

“However, the two central issues of whether Apple’s design survives a validity attack and whether Samsung’s product is too close to Apple’s design and therefore infringes it will not be finally decided for many months. If Apple is eventually successful Samsung will have to redesign or abandon the affected products and future designs for tablets from all manufacturers would have to steer clear of Apple’s design rights.”