We have only just discussed Apples Chinese iPad rival ErenEben yesterday, so it is intriguing to see that Apple have stopped selling their iPad on the Chinese Amazon website, but why?

Could this be that the iPad 3 is on its way soon, or that Apple are in legal wrangles with the Chinese government over who owns the rights to the term “iPad”.

Apple in lawsuit with Chinese company Proview:

Apple are currently in legal dealings with a Chinese company going by the name of proview, this matter is related to the use of the term “iPad” which they claim Apple do not own the rights to as they bought it from a subsidiary who was not entitled to sell the name.

If a decision is made against Apple this could mean that they will not be able to sell their popular tablet in the China region, and will kick up quite a storm for the manufacturing relationships that Apple have with China.

Apple requested the pull:

It has been said in TechCruch that it was Apple who instigated the removal of the item from the store, which means that the whole situation is a bit of a mystery as proview have apparently not asked for Apple to stop the sale of the iPad in China.

With the iPad 3 release date imminent, and with proview rumoured to be seeking $1 billion to settle the dispute, there appears to be little trouble in big China right now.

We will be keeping a close ear and eye on this news.

Do you know someone who has bought a nice new iPad or iPhone who live in another country than where their bank account details perhaps show.

A very common situation is for people who have permanently left their native land such as the UK to keep their existing bank accounts open for ease of use in many areas where there are still financial ties with the country of origin, in the case of Expats this could be for pension payments or simply paying bills that are perhaps still needed back in the homeland.

And with the selling point of credit and debit cards being the fact that they are universally accepted it appears odd that we have an issue like we have seen here.

But in the case of Cyprus expats (and we assume others) those of you who have bought a new iPad for instance, are finding it impossible to access the market that makes this device so great, the Apple app store.

The reason people are having problems is apparently due to the apple app store not accepting credit card details with an address in a separate country from the one where your issuing bank is located.

A Nicosia resident who owns an iPad and a UK credit card states:

“I can’t get into either the UK or Cyprus iTunes stores. I understand it is because I have a UK card but a Cyprus billing address.”

Apple have stated that you can only register for the Cyprus iTunes store with a Cyprus issued credit card, despite having a change of address from her UK cards stating her new address in Cyprus, the trouble is compounded by the fact that she can not even go back to the UK version of iTunes and the app store and ask for acceptance there unless she had a genuine UK address and changed all these details back which would not be an option in may cases.

Her only way forward is to open a new account up in Cyprus and get a new Cyprus credit card using her address details in Cyprus and go forward using that card, though this seems like a pain in the bu** for many.

License issues appear to be the reason:

As usual when Apple are concerned it all boils down to who owns what and where the legal boundaries lie with content owners rights and the sale of these digital assets in a global world, or at least this is what Apple woudl tell you but I suspect that there is a more worrying reason that Apple try to mitigate with this policy:

App Hustling:

Apple need to know that you as a buyer do not reside in a country other than the marketplace you access to buy content, this makes some sense when there are potentially financial gains to be had from “app hustling” where you would simply find the cheapest marketplace with the best conversion rate for your currency and join this as opposed to being dictated to, the problem Apple would then face would be that potentially only one store would reign supreme as we would all jump ship to the cheapest “per app” store, (where possible).

A few ways around these issues:

As the situation currently stands, the problem Apple may be looking to mitigate is actually causing more problems than it would ever solve as buyers of Apple devices are being barred from the very life blood than makes the gadgets so desirable; Apps, some free and some paid.

There are a few ways around this current issue though unfortunately not one of these is particularly desirable especially if you have no one to call back home who can lend a hand or you are afraid of losing your warranty or scared about tinkering with your devices software….here are your options though currently:

[arrowlist]

• Change your billing address back to the UK or wherever your card originates from in terms of the actual bank if this is causing issues
• Jailbreak – Follow this link and then use your Mac or PC to install this amended new operating system and remove the license restrictions that are currently applied to Apple iOS software, thus allowing you to access a new app store with all the same godoies and get many free applications without the need for credit card details.
• Get a friend to open a new account in iTunes with their credit card details

[/arrowlist]

It has to be said that when users only want to access basic applications that are free it does appear to be pretty damn annoying especially if this is your first apple device, and I wish Apple would look into this matter and allow a little more freedom to people who do not sit perfectly into the safety zone of what Apple deem to be legal when it comes to jurisdictions further away from “home”.

Source: Cyprus Mail

So we have had the SOPA Blackout with Wikipedia and many other staking stance at the bill being pushed through congress, and it now looks like it has been buried for a while, and this is more than likely the case rather than simply buried.

So we can all rest in our liberal, rational little worlds now the thought police have decided to come back another day, but is it all that clear on the horizon of rationalism?

Back up or die:

If you are going to conquer anything worthwhile you need back up plans, so was SOPA just a smoke screen, a SOPA screen if you will?

It appears that a Senator Lamar Smith who was largely responsible for the SOPA bill could well have another bill related to Child Pornography down his pants, this bill will track all your financial dealings online by forcing your ISP (internet service provider) to do the dirty work for the government.

The data collected will include your IP address, and there are rumours that your search history, credit card and other personal information will also be stored conveniently for 18 months, though this seems to be a little scaremongering above and beyond what is perhaps intended with this bill.

The bill is HR 1981:

How ironic that this bill should actually be called HR 1981 being so close to the famous Orwell novel 1984 book of a similar name which talks of “Big Brother” watching over its citizens with rather nasty intent.

This bill is thought to be more detrimental to civil liberties and freedoms on the internet than PIPA or SOPA ever tried to infringe.

Amending several areas of the “Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.” which changes key areas in Chapter 18 Section 2703 which requires disclosure of customer information or records to include a requirement that your internet service provider provide the following data:

A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber to or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c)(2) of this section.

Access to a record or information required to be retained under this subsection may not be compelled by any person or other entity that is not a governmental entity.

It has been noted that the third section below does attempt to look into the additional cost of implementing this bill:

The Attorney General shall make a study to determine the costs associated with compliance by providers with the requirement of paragraph (1). Such study shall include an assessment of all the types of costs, including for hardware, software, and personnel that are involved. Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Attorney General shall report to Congress the results of that study.

This changes the way that ISP’s are forced to collect Data. Where before they would have had to be given reason via a subpoena to collect personal data and then pass on this data as it was subsequently collected, now ISP’s would have to collect your personal data off the bat, just in case there is a need later, with a back up of 18 months of information on all clients.

This bill has currently gone through committee stage and is now heading for a full on vote.

Should your privacy be opened up like this for the greater safety of US kids or would this do absolutely nothing to protect children from those who are hell bent and so predisposed anyway?

I think not, this man is in fact a bit of a nutter.

It has been confirmed by myself that Anonymous have indeed taken down the DOJ website as reported on The Next Web.

It would appear that Universal music is also affected and that AnonOps is claiming responsibility for them both so far on twitter.

The DOJ website last tested was probably taken down by a DDoS attack as it has been rumored to have been slow all day, the same is likely of universal music.

Follow the conversation by checking out the hashtag #OpPayBack on twitter.

The attacks follow the take down of the megaupload site and the indictments of seven people who are thought to be key players at Megaupload. 4 have so far been arrested including founder Kim Dotcom.

We have already reported that Kodak was due to apply for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, which will allow them to continue to trade until a restructuring and funding exercise went ahead and hopefully saved all or part of the core business.

After weeks of speculation Mr Perez, Kodak’s CEO under siege stated:

“After considering the advantages of Chapter 11 at this time, the board of directors and the entire senior management team unanimously believe that this is a necessary step and the right thing to do for the future of Kodak,”

Kodak assets and debt:

With assets of some $5.1 billion and debts of some $6.75 billion, the debts are made up of some 40 entities who each lay claim to small to large debts owed by the company, these range from Walmart being owed a measly $11.4 million right up to Bank of New York Mellon which is owed a rather huge $668 million.

Hollywood debts:

People forget that Kodak worked with the movie industry and were not just based purely in print, and with these relationships in mind it has been noted that they owe Warner Brothers and Disney large sums of money also.

Citigroup to the rescue?

So with such a large company bowing under such a large amount of debt, who in these money worried times would want to lend to a company that seemingly needs so much restructuring and guiding to a new profitable path?

Well Citigroup has committed nearly $1 billion in credit to help aid the company restructure their finances under chapter 11, and this should help to alleviate concerns of the 17,000 string global workforce who are obviously concerned about the safety of their jobs with the news.

At its peak Kodak employed some 130,000 globally in the mid 1980’s.

4 objectives while under chapter 11:

Mr Perez has stated in a video on the Kodak website that they have four main aims to achieve while under chapter 11 protection and they are:

Kodak Press Release from process supplies on Vimeo.

[arrowlist]

• Obtaining the financing to reassure its employees, customers and other stakeholders that the company will stay in business.
• Enabling it to pursue patent infringement claims against major companies including Apple Inc.
• Adjusting its “legacy costs” to a fairer level.
• Driving growth in the printing businesses which MrPerez has declared is Kodak’s future.

[/arrowlist]

Kodak want to sell patents but feel better positioned with help:

While under court supervision it seems Kodak feel better positioned to sell patents that could fetch some serious money, with a rumoured $3 billion potentially up for grabs.

“The business reorganization is intended to bolster liquidity in the U.S. and abroad, monetize non-strategic intellectual property, fairly resolve legacy liabilities, and enable the company to focus on its most valuable business lines,”

With some 27,00 retirees in Kodaks home county of Rochester alone, some are worried that these veterans will be affected most by the move but many feel that it is the best direction for the company with many firms emerging after Chapter 11 protection in a better shape than they were prior, and continue to trade in some capacity where otherwise they would have simply gone under.

Times they have a changed:

I remember the days, back in the early 90’s when I thought I was really cool with my Super 8 mm on Bournemouth beach taking arty shots of all my friends smoking, drinking and messing about, then sending my Kodak pre-paid three minute super 8mm film back to a development lab in order to wait for three weeks until it was processed and dutifully sent back to watch on any white wall via a small projector, oh how times have changed.

I do hope Kodak find a way out of this predicament but am not convinced that they have the dynamic nature in their core business to really come out fighting and forge a path in a market so competitive and difficult to compete in as the print industry, but then again I know nothing much about it in all honesty!

Want to look at a history of Kodak, take a look at our infographic here:

What do you think Kodak should do, and are you worried about your job if you work for the firm?

You will more than likely have now heard about the US governments attempt to bring in a bill that would apparently help stop US internet users gaining access to pirate copies of digital assets such as films and music…and in theory help stop piracy in its tracks.

Cue the SOPA Blackout:

The SOPA bill is seen by many to be an amazingly draconian way of attempting to control online piracy from foreign sources such as ThePirateBay.

In a good article on the proposals over at Toms hardware, a list of the SOPA issues that seem to present themselves aims to highlight how dangerous this bill could be for all site owners and ultimately could help turn the US into another highly regulated China, Iran or similar state, and we know how much Americans would detest to be in that club.

The issues:

[arrowlist]

• Assign liability to site owners for everything users post, without consideration for whether or not the user posted without permission. Site owners could face jail time or heavy fines, and DNS blacklisting.
• It would require web services like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter to monitor and aggressively filter everything all users upload.
• It would deny site owners due process of law, by initiating a DNS blacklisting based solely on a good faith assertion by an individual copyright or intellectual property owner.
• It would give the U.S. government the power to selectively censor the web using techniques similar to those used in China, Malaysia and Iran.

[/arrowlist]

The scarier side to SOPA:

The fact is that the bill will give far reaching powers to the US government to take control of US ISP’s and demand “infringing” foreign websites are taken down from the internet in the US and potentially elsewhere.

The problem is there seems to be very little detail as to where this would stop as a measure to reduce piracy.

And for this reason, many who champion free speech and less governmental control for the sake of control are showing solidarity by taking their sites down today to highlight just how much of an issue a site like Wikipedia being taken down or indeed Google, Facebook, Twitter etc would cause the world…all of which so easily fit into qualifying sites that could be taken down by this bill at the drop of a hat.

The bill states that any site that links, hosts or has relationships in any way to pirated/copyrighted content could effectively be taken down in the US without any serious due process in place that would allow the owner of the site to actually address any issues flagged, prior to a site being taken down, guilty before charged.

This is too much control in the hands of people who do not fully understand the internet, and is could be used to stifle genuine innovation and honest errors on sites that the US really should have no proper control over, it is your internet freedom that is coming under threat, not your jobs.

Indeed it would be very easy to use a hacker(s) to add dodgy links to any website (as Anonymous are rumored to be doing to Sony) which would essentially result in this bill having the power to then shut that site down if they choose.

But you would not need to do this under the bill as site owners will be responsible for EVERYTHING that is posted or contained on your site, background music on videos uploaded, links in comments….the list goes on.

Silicon valley v’s Hollywood:

Of course this is all hidden behind “saving jobs”, and only affecting “certain” sites, but these bills always start small and eventually end up strangling the very areas they aim to champion.

For this reason, Wikipedia have done the good thing and actually stood up for the average Joe, of course we all understand that piracy is tantamount to theft, but in the same manner, we do not ban the use of cars globally just because some vehicles are used in bank robberies, or the sale of blank DVD’s, what on earth are we giving far reaching powers to US government to police the global internet with rules that are so unbelievably flimsy as to be ridiculous.

Devil in the detail:

I will be looking more closely at the bill in an article due today or tomorrow and will highlight how the devil is indeed in the detail as so many legal documents are made this way, and the vagueness in language is indeed the very weapon that this bill can and would use to inflict damage to sites that are “facilitating” copyright infringements and such like.

Scary indeed…so please spread this news far and wide and go join this petition here to stop this crazy bill getting passed.

The UK’s shadow minster for media Helen Goodman has been sharply critical of the UK governments handling of the UK 4G auction that is expected at the end of this year.

UK taxpayers losing out:

The Labour Councilor claims that UK taxpayers are losing out the longer the auction drags on, According to Goodman, money raised form the auction should be bringing in some £2 billion and £4 billion in capital, and with license fees expected to bring in some £300 million per year, the UK is seemingly short changed the longer this process drags on.

There is also a knock effect to the UK economy with improved communication and speeds meaning increased productivity and associated revenues.

In a statement related to the issue, the minister said,

“The auction could have taken place in 2010 but this government decided not to give Ofcom the backup to go ahead with the sale of 4G,”

She then went on to state that with so many mobile and internet users in rural areas looking for improved communication options, the delay was not helping these people either get online with faster speeds or have an improved mobile device that will help to bring them more freedom with communication but also more revenue for the government.

Networks to blame:

It is thought that that the battle to gain the best possible license between the networks is at the heart of the delays coupled with the delayed responses from government, as a result it looks likely that one of the biggest countries in Europe will actually be the last country to gain a 4G spectrum option.

Kettle black?:

This statement could be construed as sounding pretty rich, coming from an ex government who got some £23 billion from the sale of the 3G spectrum and to which the UK taxpayer now seems to be pretty seriously in the red despite….who cares about a few hundred million now…!?

This Friday, Apple published their 2012 “Supplier Responsibility Progress Report” which contains data from 229 audits taken from their supply chain in 2011. This figure is up from 127 audits conducted 2010.

In light of major issues reported about the Apple supply chain over the last few years, and a whole host of human labour rights and environmental practices of these companies, Apple has now finally published a list of suppliers that are involved with the manufacture of the iPhone, iPad and other devices that Cupertino design in California and manufacture in China. (by and large).

It makes for interesting reading and goes some way to showing Apple in a better light and understandably it is good to see that the company have indeed moved towards better ethics, this is not to excuse Apples bad choice of certain suppliers, and with the serious issues that have been going on in some of these places it is difficult to excuse.

Apples commitment to social responsibility:

Apple is committed to driving the highest standards for social responsibility throughout our supply base. We require that our suppliers provide safe working conditions, treat workers with dignity and respect, and use environmentally responsible manufacturing processes wherever Apple products are made.

The results of the report:

On reading the report it can be seen that the Apple Supplier Code of Conduct is essentially disregarded on many many occasions, this has to be an issue that Apple address and some would say that this has taken too long, we all know corporations can hide behind all manner of cloaks when it suits, and it would be pretty difficult to believe that no one at Apple knew nothing about these breaches of pretty key operating policies.

Apple Supplier Code of Conduct

The report highlighted many areas, and at 26 pages long, I am only summarizing what was said, suffice to say every part of Apple’s code of conduct was broken in some way or another at various times. Here are some main points from various sections:

Ethics:

There are a number of ethical violations committed by Apple suppliers according to the report and these include falsifying audit information, rosters, unsavory behavior towards foreign workers and other generally bad practices that are not nice to hear about in the workplace.

Environment:

Problems found at Apple suppliers in the report range from poor disposal of hazardous material to a lack of proper environmental impact assessments, air emissions, and other areas, it was seen that many of the suppliers in the audit appear to have breached various guidelines from the Apple Supplier Code of Conduct

Worker Heath and Safety:

Explosions that killed 4 at the Foxconn factory and another explosion at the Ri-Teng (a subsidiary of Pegatron) factory which injured scores, highlighted that there was a flagrant disregard to the health and safety of staff who worked with combustible materials and dust, and supplied Apple with key componenets.

Apple have gone on to say that they have worked with Foxconn who are a major supplier to Apple and have put in place various measures to help staff and the company comply better with Apples code.

Too little too late?

Taking a look at the amount of audits taken place over the last 5 years, it is quite shameful considering the attention that the Apple supply chain has had over issues such as worker rights, suicide and health and safety, that it has taken so long to finally do this PR..ahem, supply chain audit exercise, now they have got to the dizzy heights of success that they obviously wanted to achieve with the iPhone and iPad.

What do you think to Apples eventual audit report?

You can read the full Apple report here:

In what looks like an attempt to tell the world that Kodak has value somewhere, Kodak has looked on Apple and HTC to get their legal guns out over patents once more.

Kodak fall from grace:

With talk of Kodak filing for bankruptcy protection last week, news that the NYSE was looking to delist the 130 year old company for trading with a value under $1 per share for so long comes as a surprise to many.

The Rochester based imaging giant has taken a fall from grace over recent years, and is looking to take a leaf out of Apples love of litigation.

The base of the claims lie with Kodak believing that both HTC and Apple are infringing some of their patents related to digital imaging, and more specifically image transmission and preview, with specific devices being pinpointed for the infringement, these include the Apple iPad, iPhones and iPods with HTC smartphones and tablets also infringing four of the key patents.

HTC also accused of the same Apple and RIM patent issues:

An ongoing two year old issue related to “image-preview” patents, and technology owned by Kodak, has now seen HTC included in the mix.

The lawsuits which were filed on Tuesday, I feel aim to highlight that the flailing Kodak Corp still has some residual value, in a bid to bump share prices up a little and make the world feel like nothing is wrong at the bad ship Kodak, the truth being far from this.

Kodak share price plummets over 12 years:

Kodak has seen its share price plummet in the last few years, and now currently sells shares at less than $1 each on average for the last month, from a much mightier $66 only 12 years ago, indeed only last week, news of the bankruptcy filing, sent Kodak shares down to a new record low of some $.36 each.

With an overall loss of 99% of market value in 12 years, that is one bad decade for Kodak.

Kodak share hike saves them getting delisted from NYSE:

Indeed only this week Kodak saw a much needed price hike sending shares closer to $1 for the first time in a long while, all on the back of an admission that they need to restructure and cut costs, but also perhaps on the back of threats from the New York Stock Exchange who have warned that Kodak’s shares will be ‘delisted’, or dropped, unless they stop looking so sickly.

If Kodak do indeed go under this year, we have provided a nice graphic for you to take a look at the once mighty company prior to their unfortunate demise.

Click here for History Of Kodak Infographic.

Talks of licensing deals worth over $1 billion are still ongoing with Apple and RIM so we will keep you posted on news related to this area.

What do you think of Kodak going under this year? Likely or unlikely?

Can you protect a persons identity after their death?

it would appear that there are only a few states in the US where some form of protection is offered to a person after their untimely departure from the land of the living, and those states include California and, Texas but not New York.

Apple will try to block Steve Jobs doll anyway:

Apple love a good lawsuit, so it was only expected that the freakish Steve Jobs doll that has been created by inicons would face some serious objections from Cupertino land, but have Apple got any basis for a challenge here?

In a letter to Inicons ahead of the expected February launch, Apple used the old chestnut that stopped the earlier figure of Steve Jobs created by M.I.C. Gadget from ever seeing the light of day, and sent a letter stating that:

“unauthorized use of a person’s name and/or likeness constitutes a violation of California Civil Code Section 3344, which prohibits the use of any person’s name, photograph or likeness in a product without that person’s prior consent […].”

However, Jeff Roberts of paid content seems to think that the doll will be legal, but only in some states:

“Apple’s legal claim is largely bogus. While people can indeed own rights to their likeness, those rights usually apply only to living people, unlike other forms of intellectual property like patents or copyrights, image rights do not survive beyond the grave in most places”

Stating that under US law “personality rights” only exist at state level, with only a few of these actually recognizing image rights after death, which includes California, Jobs’ birth state.

States that will likely ban the Steve Jobs doll:

States and countries that may see a ban base don image rights law after death:

[arrowlist]

US States that may ban sale of Steve Jobs Doll:

• Indiana
• Illinois
• Texas
• Connecticut
• Georgia
• Florida
• California
• Ohio
• Washington
• New Jersey
• Nevada
• Nebraska

Countries:

• Germany
• Argentina

[/arrowlist]

What is the doll?

The doll will be made up of a number of pieces and will be a fairly realistic 1/6th scale version of the man himself. The pieces that will be included are two sets of spectacles, a movable head, a turtleneck black jumper, signature blue jeans, a black leather belt, sneekers, a pair of black socks, and a chair. There will also be two apples, and a backdrop which reads “one more thing”.

At $99 will you be buying this effigy of Steve jobs to worship and offer small Apples to on a regular basis, or will you be getting one to use it for some sort of voodoo shenanigans?

And is this doll in bad taste or is it a novel, and fun, way of remembering a man whom many consider of god like status, while others see him as a killer of all things innovation wise, while looking after number one?

Your thoughts on the matter please.

Have Kodak hit hard times and accepted that the show is over as bankruptcy looms:

Did you know that Kodak actually invented the Worlds first digital camera in 1975.

So, with Kodak having a huge list of “firsts” under their belt, it is rather a sad day when an originally innovative company such as Kodak, who had such global weight in the technology and imaging sector, looks like it will decide to file for bankruptcy as it can not compete in any of the territories it currently operates in, and in some cases dominated. Believing that Chapter 11 Bankruptcy is the way forward.

This type of bankruptcy gives a corporation some time to continue trading and hopefully find a rescue package while benefiting from certain bankruptcy rules that normally apply.

Kodak sell off patents:

When you are a 131 year old company with Kodak’s pedigree (albeit somewhat off kilter of recent years) you are likely to have some pretty juicy patents in the cupboard, and Kodak are well and truly in the market for selling some of these off.

With a rumored 1,100 patents Kodak are wanting to claw back some cash in the run up to the expected bankruptcy filing, and are hoping that they can then obtain a $1 billion package that will aid their operational requirements while they are going through the bankruptcy proceedings, with an unknown outcome at the end of this process.

Kodak bankruptcy will mean job losses?

With Kodak currently employing some 19,000 + people globally, many will be worried that this news could signal the death of the company that pays their wages in the coming months.

In a rather sombre note, Mr Eastman the Kodak founder took his own life aged 77 saying:

“To my friends, my work is done. Why wait?”

I wonder if his legacy will see Kodak the company see the same fate, or, if the raising of capital after the sale of patents and a rally for cash, will be enough to look into keeping other areas alive that Kodak operate in, though these look decidedly scary from an investors view.

With Kodak recently deciding to focus on the printer market and only managing to achieve just short of 3% market share in the months up to the end of 2011, what do you think Kodak should do?

Kodak’s Illustrious past:

Here is an infographic list of Kodak Historic Milestones achieved in their 130+ years of trading so far.

Is it likely they will find a buyer for the company while under chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, or will they slowly let the company die, while salvaging as much cash from the sale of patents on the way?

HASBRO will sue ASUS over what they believe is a copycat name from their famous 1980’s television series.

We all remember the transformers cartoons from the 1980’s and the new variations on a theme, though you may not be aware that the toy firm HASBRO owns the transformers brand and line, and they have not been too happy that ASUS have decided to release a “transformer” tablet model and even worse in their eyes, added the term “Prime” onto the end.

So with the slightly random ASUS Transformer Prime release schedule rolling out in the US, we examine what areas HASBRO have issues with.

Yes, Optimus prime was the leader of the transformers, who battled the decepticons in every episode, using their ingenious and thoroughly outrageous method of “transforming”.

HASBRO are quoted saying:

“The specific actions we are taking today against Asus underscores yet again Hasbro’s willingness to pursue companies who misappropriate our intellectual property for their own financial gain.”

How they actually hope to prove that the word “transformer” and “prime” will have any benefit to ASUS driven from the television series or any detriment to HASBRO or the brand “Transformers” is beyond me, unless they own the copyright to very commonly used words, which they do not, then I see no way of this holding up and is seemingly an exercise in futility.

Can HASBRO really sue though?

Well they can always have go, the only real leg they have to stand on, is if they could prove that buyers of the new tablet could for one minute be under the belief that they were buying a licensed product in the ASUS Transformer Prime tablet, but it would seem a little far fetched that they would ever get anywhere as they both operate in such different markets. With ASUS hardly copying anything other than two words that are in common use anyway, but….the ASUS Transformer Prime can go from Tablet PC into Laptop in a few small moves, exactly like Optimus prime did, well…dont be stupid, its a sodding computer not a kids toy (arguably I suppose).

HASBRO you risk looking more ridiculous than if you just kept your nose out of this issue, as I see no benefit from starting another legal war related to mobile technology….spare us more of these stories for 2012 please.

The ban that will come into play from April the 18th 2012 will see certain HTC models that infringe Apple patents banned from import, this however does leave HTC with plenty of time to create workarounds and sidestep the ban after altering the areas that have caused the problems.

The ITC is seen as a quasi-judicial court and could end up being the home of a new privacy court in the US if opponents of the Hollywood backed copyright bill get their way.

No disruption at all to HTC:

Pierre Ferragu, a senior analyst at Sanford C Bernstein, a London based search firm is quoted saying:

“this ruling will represent absolutely no disruption at all to HTC’s business in the U.S.”

Talking of the issues to CNET, HTC general counsel Grace Lei said:

“We are gratified that the Commission affirmed the judge’s initial determination on the ‘721 and ‘983 patents, and reversed its decision on the ‘263 patent and partially on the ‘647 patent. We are very pleased with the determination and we respect it. However, the ‘647 patent is a small UI experience and HTC will completely remove it from all of our phones soon.”

The issue mainly related to an Apple owned patent that is numbered 5,946,647 and was granted in 1999, this patent offers a way of identifying features such as a phone number or address and then parsing this to produce another function such as a dialler interface, or what is termed “appropriate actions”.

HTC are seen as a vulnerable corporation when it comes to technology patents as they do not have the depth of patents that more established firms have access to, though it has to be said that currently, if you have deep pockets, you can buy your own patents that help fight litigation such as this.

HTC bought S3 Graphics this year in order to obtain patents that may help them fight law suits that are currently taking place or may emerge in the future.

HTC and Apple were the first companies to start the war on patents related to the Android O/S after HTC were the first company to release an all Android phone in the G1, since then, Google has handed HTC a number of patents transferred on September the 1st 2011 in order for HTC to fight their own battles with Apple, these were picked up by Google from Palm, Motorola, and Openwave Systems.

What do you think of this ongoing litigation between firms based on patents, is it laughable, needed, or is it just a version of corporate tug of war, for the sake of it?

BT sues Google:

The Google Android operating system is one of the most heavily attacked O/S’s we have covered, with litigation from Microsoft, Apple and Oracle all under way in US courts, all with varying issues relating to patents that they claim Google’s Android operating system has stolen or copied extensively.

Now we can add BT to the mix, formerly known as British Telecom, who have been in the mobile game since its birth with a side arm originally called Cellnet, under this guise they invested billions into technology and in total they now own some 5000+ mobile technology related patents, and in the last 5 years have invested over £5 billion into their mobile division.

In a statement relating to the claim, BT said:

“BT can confirm that it has commenced legal proceedings against Google Inc by filing a claim with the US District Court of Delaware for patent infringement. BT’s constant investment in innovation has seen it develop a large portfolio of patents which are valuable corporate assets. This is about protecting BT’s investment in its intellectual property rights and innovation.”

What do BT claim infringements on:

A number of areas are being looked into from BT and these include:

[arrowlist]

• Access to mobile services and content.
• Navigation and guidance information.
• technology related to location-based services

[/arrowlist]

Android not the only area that Google is under attack from BT:

The ramifications of these allegations for Google spread much deeper than just the Android O/S, with BT claiming that the patent issues are present in Google’s map technology, advertising platforms, and music division, as well as the Android O/S.

BT filed civil suit in Delaware court:

BT have filed their claim with a court in Delaware, claiming infringements of one or more of its six patents, and has asked that the case be trialled by jury and that unspecified damages are included.

Google claim that the proceedings are “without merit” and that it would vigorously defend itself against them.

Here is a list of the services that BT claim Google infringe from their own patents and applications:

[arrowlist]

• Storage, retrieval and delivery of location-based activities of Google’s search engine
• Android
• AdMob
• AdSense
• Gmail
• Google+
• Google Maps
• Google Offers
• Google Location

[/arrowlist]

Compensation sought from Google:

BT claim that Google have obtained a substantial benefit from these products and services, and that litigation aims to include and obtain some sort of recompense for the use of BT’s patents and applications without their consent.

Nothing new in mobile land:

The fact of the matter is that with the rise of smartphone technology being so lucrative to device manufacturers and related software owners, a patent war has broken out in almost every nook and crevice in the mobile technology industry, we have covered the issue extensively over the last 6 months, with many companies involved in serious legal challenges after rival corporations have either bought the rights to existing patents (patent trolling) or looked back at their own catalogue of patents and hoped to find some areas of similarity that they could pin point on technology or software that a rival had “copycatted” in their own design or build.

Landmark case between HTC and Apple to be finalized soon:

Android are under serious threat from Apple patents, and a new ruling could be the beginning of further issues for Google.

It is expected that The ITC (International Trade Commission) will today deliver a result on a case that has serious consequences for HTC and involves the manufacture of Android based phones, this will have implications on Google’s Android O/S which it has so far managed to avoid from previous and ongoing challenges.

Could 2012 be the year the law took down a giant?

There is no excuse whatsoever for robbing a perfectly innocent person of his mobile phone, but of all the people to mug, one of the last people you would hope to pick would be a friend of the ruling class.

Such was the bad luck and stupidity of this particular scumbag.

Though this unfortunate mugging seems to be less about the fact that the “family” will hung, draw and quarter you for messing with their pals, and more to do with the fact that Prince Harry takes no s***, and was apparently on the hunt for his friend in the wee hours of the morning after being engaged in conversation with Mr van Straubenzee when he got mugged for his Blackberry phone.

As a result of this high profile man hunt (less for the man being hunted and more for the hunter), Harry now appears to be one of the first high profile royals to actually walk into a police station like an everyday guy and report a crime, after he was unsuccessful in finding his mugged friend.

A police source is quoted saying:

Prince Harry came into the station to give a statement. It was a separate statement from the one given by his friend who was mugged.’

It appears that a man was arrested earlier in the month (1st Dec) and has been released on bail to attend a court hearing in the new year.

Battersea is seen as good target for wealthy residents:

With South London being gentrified in many areas over the last 15 or so years, the area is also home to some of London’s toughest and most deprived estates, this close relationship of haves and have not’s has lead to a series of high profile muggings in the last few years. Only this year in February, a former aide to the Queen Mother, Niall Hall, was kidnapped after having his car carjacked by a gang who then stripped him naked and ran knives along his body, and only last month Richard Ward, 37, died from head injuries after being attacked by a gang, in an apparently unprovoked incident, once again highlighting the lack of respect many young people have for human life in Britain’s inner cities.

Yes, drivers in the US could be affected by a move to ban mobile phones while driving, and we are not taking about blatantly engaging in a call with the device to your ear, we are talking about engaging on twitter, texting, updating to facebook, etc.

National Transportation Safety Board cite smartphone increase as reason:

The National Transportation Safety Board has raised their concerns after pointing out that the increased functionality of smartphones has lead to more people feeling the need to use their device when they should be more concentrated on the road ahead.

Ban on texting, tweeting and even calling on bluetooth?

I am not one for rash decision making when it affects a persons overall freedom and criminalizes more for stupid errors.

But, I can see how texting and tweeting and generally meddling with a phone while driving could be dangerous.

I do however strongly object to anyone criminalizing a driver for talking using bluetooth, otherwise it would surely have to be law that you would also have to drive without talking to your passenger, or changing your air temperature or dials for volume etc and how dangerous would that be!

In fact I would argue that excessive noise while driving was more dangerous than talking on bluetooth due to the lack of awareness that is created when deafened by loud music.

Growing concern over gadgets in general:

NTSB chairwoman Deborah Hersman has stated that they are worried about devices in general:

“Every year, new devices are being released, people are tempted to update their Facebook page, they are tempted to tweet, as if sitting at a desk. But they are driving a car.”

Not likely to be adopted:

There are no statutory obligations for states to adopt the recommendations, and initial polls appear to show that no state will.

But a seed has been planted, and I dare say that some measures suggested will be implemented in time.

Perhaps the economic misery of the US may have more of a say right now rather than seemingly “draconian” measures to reduce road accidents.

Current law situation on driving in the US:

Unlike the UK which banned talking on a mobile while driving years ago (Bluetooth/Hands-Free is OK), the US only sees 9 states with the same ban on talking while driving, and 35 states have made texting and driving illegal.

As a last statement against the naysayers to these proposed laws, the National Transportation Safety Board say:

“We’re not here to win a popularity contest. We’re here to do the right thing. This is a difficult recommendation, but it’s the right recommendation and it’s time.”

While many believe that the move will not be a vote winner in general, the fact that a ban on in car communication via mobiles could hurt industry in the US in terms of manufacturing products for cars and general consumer devices, seems to be one of the other main reasons that these measures will not be adopted any time soon.

International pressure mounts:

In 2010, Ban Ki-moon, the secretary general of the United Nations, had looked to address the culture of multitasking while driving. And, some 30 countries have laws restricting the use of mobiles while driving, including complete bans in Germany and Portugal, so is the US being slow in looking after its Citizens or is the rest of the world being overly cautious with full bans?

We have already covered the news that Carrier IQ was potentially tracking over 140,000,000 mobile devices at the end of last week.

Now, when you hear the name Carrier IQ, you automatically think of potentially illegal phone tracking, so it is also interesting to see just how quickly the legal teams gather pace when the mention of a breach of privacy is muted.

A number of law firms are gunning for carrier IQ and companies who used their technology:

The following law firms have jointly filed a class action complaint in a Delaware Court against carrier IQ:

Eichen Crutchlow Zaslow & McElroy LLP, Sianni & Straite LLP, and Keefe Bartels L.L.C.

This relates to what is being described as:

“cell phone tracking software scandal.”

and an,

“unprecedented breach of the digital privacy rights of 150 million cell phone users.”

It is reported that HTC, AT&T, Motorola, Apple, Sprint, T-Mobile and more are also going to be hearing from the law firms mentioned above in relation to the potential abuse of privacy of smartphone owners globally.

Carrier IQ sounds ostensibly good natured:

The problem as I see it with carrier IQ is that to all intents and purposes it masquerades as a perfectly safe and capable tracking software that is intended to aid manufacturers find bugs and issues with their devices and networks, and so make the users life more pleasurable, and pain free.

The problem is that this software is installed discretely without the device owner having any knowledge, and there is no opt in or out option when you get your new device.

The company sell the software as:

“Mobile Service Intelligence solutions that have revolutionized the way mobile operators and device vendors gather and manage information from end users”

Sounds all well and good, but surely personal privacy is a highly valued right in our society.

Personal privacy the issue for most:

Many people in the US and wider feel that governments and corporations are taking more and more liberties with our own personal information. And while we hope that the concern is only that, a real issue presents itself when something so covert as tracking software is installed on your personal communication device.

The issue is about full transparency, as there is also a theory that keystrokes are included in the data that gets reported (if a patent application is anything to go by), though it has to be said that I am becoming less convinced that this was the case currently (perhaps this was due to be rolled out later)….

At which point, I wonder when we would have been informed of this?

My guess is never.

David Straite, one of the lawyers leading this crusade, said in a statement.

“This latest revelation of corporate America’s brazen disregard for the digital privacy rights of its customers is yet another example of the escalating erosion of liberty in this country,”

David Straite’s co-counsel Steve Grygiel added:

”Anyone who cares at all about their personal privacy, or the broader constitutional right to privacy, ought to care and care a great deal about this case.”

What do you think to this news?

Is it getting blown out of proportion? Or is this kind of privacy invasion best nipped in the bud early before we hand over too much control blindly to the “powers that be”?

It seems that Samsung are under fire from Apple in so may territories and countries that the South Korean smartphone and tablet manufacturer can not even begin to stand up before the Apple legal team come knocking!

10 countries and 4 continents:

Yes Samsung are currently at loggerheads with Apples legal team in 10 countries in 4 continents and this includes huge wealthy territories such as Germany, UK, US, France, Japan, Australia and South Korea.

Good news at last?

Are Samsung out of the legal mire?

Additionally to potentially good news for Samsung which we reported yesterday, where the Australian federal court had ruled that a prior ban on the sale of the galaxy tab was incorrect, it seems that Samsung may have won a benchmark ruling in the US also.

A court in California has ruled that the bid to block the Galaxy tab and Galaxy smartphone from being sold is not going to be upheld.

Judge Lucy Koh said:

“It is not clear that an injunction on Samsung’s accused devices would prevent Apple from being irreparably harmed. Indeed, given the evidence Samsung presented, it seems likely that a major beneficiary of an injunction would be other smartphone manufacturers.”

The preliminary injunction which would force Samsung to remove their Galaxy products from sale was deemed to be an excessive and extraordinary measure to take at this stage.

The lawsuit started in April and surrounds three design and one software patent that Apple disputed. This ruling may not see Samsung win the cases it is currently involved in, but may see a halt to the “guilty before verdict” precedents that seem to have been set in many areas.

If you have not been keeping up with Apple’s recent legal actions against Samsung et al then please do type “Samsung”, “Legal” or “Patent” into our search box to your right and read all about it.

In yet another blow to the South Korean device manufacturer, Australian courts have upheld a continued ban on the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab from stores in the country.

Prior to the recent ruling, a judge in Australia had deemed that Apple had:

“established a prima facie case for an entitlement to relief on the Heuristics Patent”.

And Samsung duly appealed and actually obtained some degree of success, though unfortunately for Samsung this did not mean that they could simply start selling their tablet again in the country. Apple was given until the end of the week to respond to the ruling that overturned Apple’s desire to block all sales of the Samsung Tab in Australia.

Apple take Samsung Galaxy Tab case to High Court:

Obviously Apple did this with gusto in a move designed to further delay any verdict by taking the case to the high court, so now the high court of Australia must come to a decision, but until this actually happens, the ban will remain. Giving Apple an extra few days or weeks to get back to their legal team and start working out further counter claims and plans of attack and defence.

Such are the stakes in the fast paced environment of tablet and smartphone technology that every day and month counts, especially coming up to Christmas.

Yes, Apple have been heavily gunning for rival manufacturers of smartphones and tablets over what they perceive are patent issues related to their own technology.

But out of all the companies that have been affected by recent litigation, Samsung seem to be the ones who have had it the toughest, with a current ban on sales of their Galaxy tablet in Germany which looks set to be lifted after Samsung have redesigned the tab to counteract claims of copying.

What do you think to Apple’s continued aggression related to patent issues? Are they pushing their weight around a bit too much or simply protecting their assets?

On Friday, Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office reached the decision not to pursue claims that Daum (Korean internet search specialist) and Google, actively collected illegal data of smartphone users.

Yonhap News reports that the legal challenge did uncover that Google and Daum were collecting location data, but this was only the position of the user and not any further details about them.

This comes as news from the US shows that Carrier IQ could be reporting information back to companies who want to learn about a smartphone or device users specific actions including messaging and keystrokes.

Admob was the accused platform:

It was thought that Admob was the platform that could have been reporting user data back to Google. Earlier in the year the offices of Google were raided by Seoul police in order to secure hard drives and learn more about how the Admob platform was being used.

GPS coordinates OK but not personal information:

One prosecutor admitted that it would be tough to use a smartphones IP address as people moved around suggesting that it was OK to obtain location data through GPS but nothing more than this.

Deeper murky waters:

In news related to the relationship between Daum and Google, it has become apparent that Daum was also separately cleared of capturing data this Friday, after law enforcers also raided their offices in May.

Google also have other pressing issues with the Korean law agencies, as they are accused of blocking and banning search rivals from including third-party applications on Android handsets.

Make no bones about it, the following article is potentially one of immense concern to many users of mobile devices.

And centres around a little known mobile analytics’s company called Carrier IQ.

So what exactly is Carrier IQ?

Trevor Eckhart, a security researcher and other mobile security personnel and firms have found information about Carrier IQ that seems to suggest that the unknown software sits very quietly at the back of devices and is pretty difficult to remove.

In this video Trevor Eckhart explains his findings and concerns:

Carrier IQ runs hidden in the background of a users mobile device and does not require any current authorisation to function.

On the Android operating system the software can track and report on the following:

Keystrokes, storing text messages, location tracking, recording telephone calls, and other areas.

What the software looks to do is to record users movements and actions under the pretence that this will be used by manufacturers to solve bug issues and other device specific manufacturing issues relating to the 140,000,000 devices that the software is already installed on.

140 Million devices have the Carrier IQ software installed on them:

So as you may imagine the company and it’s software are not particularly in the good books of the likes of mobile security researchers, legal critics and privacy advocates.

Partners allegedly include:

[arrowlist]

• Samsung
• Verizon
• RIM
• Nokia
• Sprint
• HTC
• Apple

[/arrowlist]

Which phones and carriers have Carrier IQ installed?

So what do the carriers and device manufacturers think of this technology and how open are they all about using it?

HTC blames carriers:

In a shrewd move by HTC, they simply pass the buck to the carriers. But have said that they will now look to an opt out option, which possibly should have been always available.

“It is important to note that HTC is not a customer or partner of Carrier IQ and does not receive data from the application, the company, or carriers that partner with Carrier IQ. HTC is investigating the option to allow consumers to opt-out of data collection by the Carrier IQ application.”

“Carrier IQ is required on devices by a number of U.S carriers so if consumers or media have any questions about the practices relating to, or data collected by, Carrier IQ we’d advise them to contact their carrier.”

Sprint and AT&T statement:

Sprint and AT&T have confirmed that they do use Carrier IQ on their handsets, and cite “network” performance as the sole reason for it’s adoption.

Microsoft statement:

Joe Belfiore has stated that Windows phones do not use carrier IQ.

Apple statement:

“We stopped supporting CarrierIQ with iOS 5 in most of our products and will remove it completely in a future software update. With any diagnostic data sent to Apple, customers must actively opt-in to share this information, and if they do, the data is sent in an anonymous and encrypted form and does not include any personal information. We never recorded keystrokes, messages or any other personal information for diagnostic data and have no plans to ever do so.”

VZW corporate communications statement:

Jeffrey Nelson of VZW corporate communications has confirmed that Carrier IQ isn’t on any of its handsets.

UK device owners not affected:

Apparently UK device owners are not affected by the Carrier IQ software we will report more on this in a later article related solely to the UK.

Opt-In Policy missing:

Wiretap laws have been violated according to one legal professional.

Paul Ohm was a former prosecutor for the Department of Justice and is currently a professor at the University of Colorado Law School.

Mr Ohm has stated that based on the companies “assumed” prior (all things being so hush hush) collection of users text messages data, then there could be calls for a class action related to privacy, especially taking into account the lack of an opt in option:

“In the next days or weeks, someone will sue, and then this company is tangled up in very expensive litigation. It’s almost certain.”

What you can do to remove the software:

Trevor Eckhart has released an application called TestApp (pro and free), which requires your phone to be rooted. Once done, there appears to be quite a good chance that you can remove the software entirely, another way you can halt Carrier IQ is to install a custom ROM.

Now check out the dislikes on this company video:

Thank to Engadget a little more clarity can be obtained related to the information contained in the above video:

“it is not recording keystrokes”

Apparently contradictory to Carrier IQ’s assertion that it “does not collect keystrokes” is the company’s patent application #20110106942, published May 5, 2011. An excerpt of the claims follows:

2. A method for collecting data at a server coupled to a communications network, comprising: transmitting to a device a data collection profile, wherein the data collection profile comprises a plurality of parameters defining a set of data to be collected by the device, a first condition under which the set of data is to be collected, and a second condition under which the set of data is to be transmitted; and receiving from the device the set of data collected in response to the second condition.

10. The method of claim 2, wherein the set of data relates to an end user’s interaction with the device.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein the interaction with the device comprises the end user’s pressing of keys on the device.

We will keep you posted on the future legal wrangles of this company and assess outcomes as and when they occur.

Samsung bowed down to a court ruling related to the sale of their popular tablet in Germany after a ruling many weeks ago declared that the tablet was rather too close to the Apple iPad, the result of which has meant that the South Korean firm have gone away and after withdrawing their tablet from this huge market, have now come back with a revised design that has an altered metal frame and a shift of speaker position to counteract copycat claims.

New Galaxy tab specifically for Germany:

The new design will be released to Germans on the 21st November just in time for Christmas and should allow Samsung a chance to gain a little more traction with their otherwise popular Galaxy tablet in the biggest European marketplace.

Samsung fight back:

The legal landscape between Apple and Samsung sees many cases being fought between the firms, it has all got really rather messy in the smartphone and tablet arena for the two tech giants.

Samsung have retaliated heavily with an attempt to ban the iPhone 4 from sale in France, Italy, Germany and Australia. A hearing in Paris due on the 18th of November will show if Samsung will have one up on Apple in time for the festive period after being shut out of Germany for so long with their Galaxy tab.

Apple involved with many lawsuits:

Samsung is not the only company involved in disputes with Apples legal team, though their are currently around 30 cases between the two firms globally.

Nokia, Microsoft, and HTC are also Involved in litigation with Samsung with Microsoft, Nokia and HTC challenging Apple over over the use of the term “app store”.

We expect a fair bit more of this type of tit for tat to occur as technology looks more and more similar month by month, any pressure put on manufacturers to delay release dates or recall already released models significantly affects a model’s chances of getting traction prior to a new release by a competitor, so this legal “game” is pretty much par for the course now in the fast moving mobile tech world.

Following the recent ban on the sale of the highly anticipated Galaxy 10.1 tab in Europe due to patent problems by a German court which we covered on the 11th of August.

Now a Dutch judge has issued a further injunction that seems to have banned the sale of some Samsung Galaxy smartphones, namely the Galaxy S, S2, and Ace from October the 13th, the reason stated was that Samsung had once again breached a patent copyright of Apples.

Apple had put forward a number of patents in question but only one stood out as relevant to the court:

The infringing patent was the “method of scrolling” or patent number 2,059,868.

Ban currently EU wide

While the ban is EU wide this does not mean that all countries in Europe are affected. The following countries are able to sell the device as normal:

Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Spain.

Update

In response to this it has been noticed online via tweakers.net that Samsung has said that it will simply replace the offending software that encroaches on Apples patent, which once implemented should allow Samsung to be able to continue to sell the phone in Europe as it will be sorted before the October deadline.

Second ruling in two weeks by European court ion Samsung devices

The second ruling by an international law court in two weeks must have Samsung worried that more patent issues may rear there ugly head and cause problems in Europe and potentially elsewhere. Maybe it is time Samsung bought a well known technology company with lots of lovely tech patents in the filing cabinets.

Now I wonder which tech company that could benefit Samsung is currently looking like it could be gobbled up at a reasonable price?

Big news in the tech world today as Google made a 63% overpayment compared to the closing price for Motorola Mobility on the New York Stock Exchange last Friday. Google appear to have successfully purchased the manufacturing arm of Motorola Solutions, the deal is however still subject to US regulatory approval.

Motorola patent portfolio:

With Google defending the Android operating system in courts, and losing out on Nortel’s massive patent portfolio the other month to a conglomerate of companies, it seems likely that buying Motorola mobility will help to potentially push back legal challenges in the future. Google did eventually acquire a host of IBM patents so could be looking quite comfortable now in their ability to fight legal battles related to technology patents. For google the truth is they have very little in the name of R&D on the manufacturing aspect of mobile and need to look to other companies to provide this expertise.

Google head to head with Apple and Nokia, Windows could benefit also:

Time will tell who or what will happen in the smartphone and tablet arena, but Windows may be happier knowing that some of Google’s current Android based manufacturers like Samsung and HTC may now start looking at Windows 7 and 8 as a real alternative to the Android O/S if they feel that their are issues with patents and an aggressive Trojan horse in the midst. Man its getting snake like in the mobile world of late!

Good time to sell for Motorola?

Is google looking to buy up patents and then sell these on and leave the manufacturing market then dissolve Motorola Mobility, who knows?

Mobile patents at a premium currently:

One thing is for certain though, with so many legal battles currently under way in the mobile world, and Apple and Google buying up IPR (intellectual property rights) in as many areas related to their core businesses, the actual value of these patents has risen enormously. On the advice of investor Carl Icahn, Motorola looked to sell off their patents after seemingly good advice was given earlier this year, yes you lost part of your company in the process but hey its been around for a while now (around 80 years) and may well never have as much value placed on it’s assets than is currently the state of play and you still get to keep Motorola Solutions, wise move me thinks.

As with any business deal, there were many ways Motorola could have sold off the rights to their patents but it would have got messy retaining rights to manufacture etc. This way is a nice clean break and allows all involved to get what they want out of the deal.

Rival manufacturers feel under threat now google are manufacturers?

It is not clear to what extent google will use the Motorola manufacturing capabilities and if they do to what extent the likes of Samsung and HTC will view this direct competition. Indeed it may be another legal issue if the monopolies commission (anti trust) finds that they are becoming a little too vertically integrated like their distant relations in the 1920’s and 30’s.

Google anti trust law suit the next legal battle?

Some of the products that Google could well be offering in the US in the coming months and years include:

[arrowlist]

• Google Broadband – an all-in-one solution
• Google GPS
• Google TV/Google set-top box
• Google Voice home phones

Having a huge manufacturer of set top boxes and a serious player in GPS navigational tools through Motonav, it only leaves Google to provide end to end internet services, which many will know they are looking at in Kansas City, with an ultra high speed connection service. So having a manufacturer of set top boxes under your belt can only ease things when it comes to R&D and costs in general….though does start to feel like Google are becoming something that many will find a little too all consuming, especially the US government if other US based firms have much to say about these developments, but all of this is fortune telling right now, we actually have no idea what Google are going to do with these newly bought patents.

What do you think of the take over? Aggressive or smart? And what do you think will be seen coming out of google now they have a manufacturer under their belt with Motorola’s weight and experience?

We have been covering many of the legal issue that are currently doing the rounds within the high tech mobile device market.

Apple have their claws into Samsung and Google over a whole manner of patents they feel have been stolen and are contained within the Galaxy 10.1 as well as other devices.

The fastest selling tablet since the iPad 2 stopped dead in its tracks:

The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 which launched in Britain in early August will now have to be removed from stores due to a decision by law courts in Germany, Samsung will also have to stop marketing the product.

Preliminary injunction to blame:

It was a regional court in Düsseldorf, Germany that granted the injunction on behalf of Apple inc, this for now halts the sale and marketing of the Galaxy 10.1 tablet and currently covers all of Europe apart from the Netherlands.

The judge presiding decided that Apple was correct in believing that the tablet had copied parts of the Apple iPad 2

Samsung can appeal:

While the judgement is in place no Samsung 10.1 tabs can be sold or marketed within the restricted zone set out in the judgement, however Samsung can appeal but will not see the current ban lifted until it was heard and a decision made in Samsung’s favour, this will take at at least four weeks from now.

Apple have separate lawsuit in the Netherlands

Florian Muller an Intellectual property analyst has stated in a blog post that:

“The exception of the Netherlands is due to the aforementioned separate legal proceeding in that country. That exception relates only to Samsung’s Korean parent company, not to the German subsidiary.”

The larger cousin to Samsung’s original 7 inch offering – the plain old Galaxy tab, is a very close naughty cousin to the iPad 2 and is also a slimmer model to its unhappy family member and now has a similar sized screen.

Apple have released a statement from a spokesperson working at Apple inc saying:

“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. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”

On the flip-side Samsung’s spokespeople have only just released statements after saying that the company would not be commenting on legal proceedings.

Here is what Samsung have finally said about the legal problems facing the Samsung Galaxy 10.2 tab:

“Samsung is disappointed with the court’s decision and we intend to act immediately to defend our intellectual property rights through the ongoing legal proceedings in Germany and will continue to actively defend these rights throughout the world.”

“We will take all necessary measures to ensure Samsung’s innovative mobile communications devices are available to customers in Europe and around the world.”

“The request for an injunction was filed with no notice to Samsung, and the order was issued without any hearing or presentation of evidence from Samsung.”

Second injunction from Apple related to the Samsung 10.1 tablet:

With the Australian launch of the Samsung 10.1 galaxy tablet delayed indefinitely after Apple filed a complaint to the Australian courts, and Apple also suing Samsung back in April for further perceived infringements of trademarks and patented technology, it is quite seriously hotting up in the legal arena related to the mobile market for smartphone and tablet devices. Samsung have also released counter claims related to their own technology and Apple’s alleged misuse.

So how annoyed are you that this is happening…were you looking forward to getting you hands on the Samsung 10.1 only to have a German court stop the sale of the item in its tracks?

Google has splashed out an undisclosed amount on around 1000 patents from IBM as Google attempts to create a patent portfolio that will help mitigate further legal battles that have caused concerns over their Android operating system among other things.

“Like many tech companies, at times we’ll acquire patents that are relevant to our business needs,”

“Bad software patent litigation is a wasteful war that no one will win.”

Google records 1030 patents bought in mid-July

So what have Google gone and bought?

The patents seem to range from microprocessors to memory architecture, incorporating servers and routers, so a mixed bag of technical tricks.

Google bid $900 million for Nortel patents:

In an audacious move in April 2011 Google put a bid in for 6000 of Nortel’s patents and apparently offered a stupidly high figure of $900 million. This would have given them legal rights to many patents that could help them to stave litigation in the future and put them in very strong legal standings moving forward as they have done into manufacturing and software.

Google making sure it does not lose out a second time:

Google however missed out on the chance to obtain the 6,000 patents owned by the Canadian company Nortel.

The winners of that particular sale were a consortium that contained tech giants such as Microsoft, Apple, EMC, RIM, Sony and Ericsson.

And the amount paid for these patents was a massive $4.5 billion.

Google currently being sued

We have already discussed many of Google’s current legal battles, and they are not the only tech companies that are involved in high end litigation regarding manufacturing and software.

Google Versus Oracle

In an earlier report we covered the ongoing legal battle between Oracle and Google over the Android operating system.

This battle is far from over. Though from cursory observation it appears that the damage will not be as severe as Google had feared initially, or indeed as heavy as Oracle would have liked, but the case is far from over.

Time will tell who will be the winners and losers out of all this litigation. One thing for sure is that the legal teams for the companies concerned are certainly rubbing their hands together…and they will be hoping that the magic dust does not settle any time soon, I am sure.

A recent judgement that has ruled that HTC have infringed Apple patents which could pose a serious long term threat to the Android brand and market.

Apple going litigation crazy:

With a lack of new products emerging from Apple in recent times, we have to ask the question if Apple corp. is too busy fighting legal wrangles to dedicate time to product development.

Of course this is not the case, but Apple have been seen to protect patents related to their mobile market very aggressively of late.

International Trade Commission ruling repercussions

The recent ruling by the International Trade Commission was found to uphold the infringements that Apple claimed on two counts related to the Taiwanese manufacturer HTC who use Android as the O/S for a huge percentage of its phones.

The judgements are only preliminary at the moment and will be subject to a further review, however should they be upheld they related to fundamental operations of the Android operating system and have far ranging impacts for Google and other manufacturers.

The patents that are under review following the judgement are:

No. 5,946,647: system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer-generated data

No. 6,343,263: real-time signal processing system for serially transmitted data

With Microsoft and Oracle already trying to win legal battles against the Android operating system. If the infringements are upheld it could force HTC and other manufacturers to remove some functionality in order to continue integrating the Android O/S in their mobile devices including smart phones and tablets.

Larry Page shows immaturity related to legal issues

With Google laying claim to some 700 patents, mainly relating to products rather than wireless software, a bid for Nortel’s 6000+ patents related to Telecoms and mobile communications, was seen as a move to ensure that future legal battles were nipped in the bud early, unfortunately most of the wholesale sale of these patents were snapped up by Apple and Microsoft.

When questioned about the large issues surrounding Android Larry Page the co founder of Google, was seen to dodge the main issue and boats about the number of devices that were being activated on a daily basis (around 500,000+ per day) and was found to suggest that they could develop patents as a natural growth of the Android O/S and would not need to buy or earn any mobile software patents, a very dangerous and seemingly naive standpoint considering the relative maturity in tech terms of the mobile phone software market, and the stakes resting on their own Android O/S with its lack of original patents.

Battle of the Giants on the cards?

However successful HTC has been in the last 14 years, it is shadowed by the might of a player such as Apple or Google, and with Apple going for the blood line of Android, its manufacturing base, with litigation against Motorola, Samsung and now HTC. Could the mobile world be squaring up for an eventual stab at the jugular of Google and Android once its manufacturing partners have been disarmed or wounded and perhaps see the likes of Google, Microsoft, Oracle and Nokia and others all enter the fray?

With the first round won by Apple, Microsoft and Oracle will likely be spurned on to continue their own patent claims in the hope that things could be swinging their way.

Could Windows Phone O/S benefit hugely from this insecurity from a manufacturing point of view?

Could a potential decline in the Android O/S due to concerns over its legal position lead to a very fortuitous position for the recent Nokia and Microsoft partnership and the future of Windows phone 7 O/S and Meego.

Apple app store legal battle: Are you confused yet?

We have already reported that Apple were in litigation with Amazon over the use of their own “App store”. The judge presiding over the case does however actually agree with Apple that the term “App Store” is not actually a generic term, as both Microsoft and Amazon have claimed. However, the real legal issue is related to a “likelihood of confusion” and the judge in this case has stated that the term “App Store” did not meet the required “likelihood of confusion” provision necessary to validate an immediate injunction against its use…note the term “immediate” however, time will tell what may happen in the future.

Apples new battle with GetJar a battle too far?

It would appear that Apple really do feel that they have some god given right to the term. They have cited earlier marketing efforts and huge expenditure as a reason to justify such claims be upheld and as a rational man I can understand them wanting to at least try to defend a term that does have a huge correlation to Apple. Though the truth is the claim can never really hold up currently as the term “App Store” is not a trademark, despite efforts to secure this by Apple.

Claiming that punters would get confused by the Amazon App Store and Apples App store for instance is just condescending to owners of mobile devices, surely?

GetJar still telling Apple to stick it up their Apps:

On a recent blog post GetJar have basically told Apple to sod off. And goes on to inform the reader that they stick by their position as they are not really competing with Apple, but are more like an affiliate who push visitors to the Apple App Store anyway.

I suppose Apple would say that they are pushing people to the Android market also, but without a trademark to the term App Store how can Apple get way with such a request and except this to be acted upon?

GetJar state that they have been running since 2005 (before the release of the iPhone) and that they have been operating while using the term “App store” since 2009 without any problems…..i.e Apple were very happy for GetJar to initially push their own applications before the release of competitor apps.

Apple lose face with too many Legal battles?

We reported the other week that it appeared that Apple were in a legal frenzy currently, with rifts between manufacturers, retailers, and god knows who else. Is Apple in danger of looking a bit like a sacred millionaire who has built his castle but now fears anyone who comes close to admire it?

Getjar Facebook group to help developers deal with Apple:

GetJar has now started a Facebook group called “The Open and Free App Movement,” and is aimed at helping developers understand and organise their efforts related to Apple when Apple send legal threats and people are unsure what to do and perhaps need some advice from their peers….they are quoted as saying; “people are sick of this crap”.

What do you think of Apples current legal battles, are they justified or do you think the are muddying Apples name?

Apple versus Amazon app store claim – Rejected by District judge

U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton has stated yesterday that she is probably going to deny the motion on the grounds that Apple has failed to show how consumers would be confused by the term Appstore.

I personally could not agree more, and like many, find it patronising that people could potentially get confused, by a generic term for something that means application, though this is a term Apple have used over the term “software” for many years, it is not uniquely their own word.

Irreparably Damaged?…..My Apps!

Apple had claimed that they would be irreparably damaged as consumers of Amazons app store will be confused and this would inherently lead to a loss of revenue.

Apple legal team idiotic:

The case for litigation against Amazon does seem like a total punt really as it is wholly possible to state that Amazon will introduce apps to a new audience and could potentially lose their own revenue to Apples own app store.

And Apples arrogance on the basis that we can use a “Smart” Phone but are all way too stupid to know there is an Amazon app market and also an Apple app market for each device is very patronising….surely this would work both ways mitigating any loss!

Comparing the term “App Store” to a Michigan based company who use “honeybaked ham” as a form of trademark, (I am lost at how this works) the likelihood is that Amazon will be allowed to carry on as you would expect using their own slight variation of the term App Store.

I do feel that Apple may have some kind of case if Amazons app store ends up with poorly qualified apps such as from the Google Android marketplace, but in law there seems very little you can do about a term that is similar to using toy store, pet store, or clothing store….as part of your personal brand….the word “app” can not solely be Apples surely!

Do you find it confusing that two companies are now using the same term?

In an article written the other day about what Oracle hope to achieve in damages from Google, the results of a re-examination are finally in and do not look that promising for Oracle after all:

In the re-examination of US Patent 6192476 – 17 of the 21 claims have been reject by the USPTO.

The big issue for Oracle V Google:

With this re-examination taking:

a) A long time,

and

b) Questioning just how much Oracle can expect to take to trial after this set back in only one area of its numerous claims.

It brings into sharp focus just how many legs this case has in the eyes of US law makers.

In May the Judge had asked Oracle to slim down it’s original claims from over 130, and it now looks likely that this will force Oracle to do just that or have to wait for re-examination of each area of patent under dispute….timely to say the least!

Should Oracle bow down to pressure?

So should Oracle narrow its claims as advised by the court and keep them happy or should they stick to their guns and wait to see the outcome and decision of the courts in moving forward with minimum changes to the current claims made against Google and the Android operating system.

An illustration below shows just what claims are being made against Google and what number are subjected to a re-examination process (still enforceable), and the total number of claims that are still surviving:

Summary:

“While the above table indicates there are presently still 122 claims surviving, no office action has issued in four of the cases. In the three cases where an office action has issued the stats are 66 claims, 16 claims not subject to reexam, 50 claims subject to reexam, 46 claims rejected, and 20 claims surviving. Consistent with reexamination stats that have been produced in academic studies showing 90+% of claims being rejected on reexam, here it is 92%. If that stat holds for the remaining four patents, Oracle will only have about 48 claims out of 168 that survive, and not all of those will be independent claims.”

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110621192510777

An interesting battle is under-way in the US courts, just who the eventual winner will be we really do not know…still early days really.

Who do you think will win and what effects will this have on operations at each company?

So how much do Oracle think Google owe?

Fingers to mouth – $1,000….no, sorry, $1,000,000….mmm…..No….$1,000,000,000!…..yes, one billion dollars, wahahaha!

Actually much more potentially!

In a previously redacted document the conclusions are if Google was found guilty of infringement, damages and costs in the region of 1.4 billion and 6.1 billion dollars would be likely.

“Google, if found to infringe, would owe Oracle between 1.4 and 6.1 billion dollars.”

Wilful infringement escalates damages:

Yes you heard us right, if the courts rule that Google has infringed copyrights, they face a tripling of the fine amount due to “wilful infringement”, this is how the likely bill will be in the Billions.

Google’s most costly mistake ever:

Not only is a fine of this magnitude a real blow to any companies bottom end, the fact that an ongoing licensing deal will have to be brokered after the settlement means more money will have to be passed to Oracle for the duration of the license agreement, this means that the Android O/S could end up being a nasty little alien invasion for Google.

Google make money from advertising not licensing Android:

As the Android OS is open source, Google do not earn money from owning the code, rather they allow manufacturers to use their operating system and then tag advertising onto this within apps etc to create the revenue stream, its what Google know best and until now has proven a success in almost all areas they have delved into advertising related.

So how is the Billions made up and what will the final figure actually be?

With Oracle estimating that Google earn approximately $3.35 for each device with Android installed per year, X this by 100 million devices, and you get a figure of around $335 million, divide this by 2 and you get $165 million.

Of course the total figure will depend on how far you go back as more and more devices are being brought into the market daily.

On top of this figure you need to factor in lost profits that will equate to at least $200 million, and potentially into the Billions for the alleged infringement of Java into “numerous sub-standards” and the figure you end up with will obviously be well into the Billions.

“The letter also reveals some other interesting data points, such as the terms on which Sun proposed a license deal to Google, which Google rejected: “$60 million over three years plus an additional amount of up to $25 million per year in revenue sharing.”

Licensing:

There are reports that Oracle is seeking a 50% revenue share for all the money Google makes through applications sold, and whatever happens some kind of licensing agreement will likely be the way forward even though it seems like it has been discussed in the past.

So much for the slogan “Don’t be Evil”

Google are seeking to shut Oracle up in the early stages of the legal motions, probably in fear that news of the potential settlement (in the billions) will upset and worry the Android market negatively.

Do Google really care?

Looking at the facts though, we are wondering if Google really care.

They now have an operating system that will be the number one in the new mobile SmartPhone arena, making sure they lay claim to the new promised land of mobile advertising, so was this perhaps not just an educated all guns out attempt to get first mover (or second mover) advantage before the likes of Nokia, or RIM or any other potential competitor could muscle in and do things better.

The outcome for good or worse for Google has been all positive so far, and if they have to sign over at worse 50% of revenues and a bill for damages, we are sure they will negotiate terms that suit themselves pretty damn favourably over the long term.

It seems to be the season of litigation in the technology industry why not take a look at our report on Apple and Nokia’s recent settlement.

Does Google’s seemingly underhand practices make you look at other SmartPhone operating systems with more favour or do you take all this with a pinch of salt and simply go for what looks and feels the best at the right price?