The United Kingdom's main security agency, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), is apparently working with the United States' Prism intelligence program to gather data on various internet companies, The Guardian reports. Documents given to the UK news outlet indicate that GCHQ was able to retrieve "personal material such as emails, photos and videos" from internet companies operating outside the UK, and the GCHQ employed 197 intelligence reports in 2012 alone. This allows the UK government to circumvent red tape that would otherwise tie up the process of acquiring information from companies located outside of its own region.

Apparently the GCHQ's been working with the US Prism service since "at least June 2010," and it's unknown how that's impacted UK citizens in the past several years -- a GCHQ representative wouldn't comment on how long the two agencies have been working together. Though the GCHQ didn't directly confirm the collaboration, the agency issued a statement to The Guardian stating it, "takes its obligations under the law very seriously."

The PRISM system is said to enable access to records held by the nine largest internet companies, from Apple and Google to Skype and even Engadget's parent company, AOL.

Comments

Source: The Guardian

Samsung got a big win in the International Trade Commission today, as the ITC handed down a final ruling finding that several models of AT&T-compatible iPhones and iPads infringe a Samsung patent, and issued an exclusion order preventing them from being imported, sold or distributed in the US. This final ruling comes months after an ALJ determined that Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's IP, but clearly, the commission felt differently upon its review. This final determination holds that AT&T models of the iPhone 4, 3GS and 3G, plus AT&T iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G models infringe four claims of Samsung's patent number 7,706,348 for encoding mobile communications.

The ITC reversed the ALJ's ruling in part based upon modified construction of several key terms in the claims at issue, but upheld the prior decision regarding the other three patents Samsung asserted in the action. So, what does this mean for Apple? Not a tremendous amount, truthfully, as the newly banned devices are no longer Cupertino's standard bearers and account for little of massive profits. Plus, Apple will, no doubt appeal the decision in court. Still, Samsung's bound to feel pretty good about the victory, and every little bit helps in its quest to remain atop the smartphone heap, right?

Filed under: Apple, Samsung

Comments

Via: Reuters Tech (Twitter)

Source: ITC [PDF]

In with a bang, out with a whimper. After making us fear for the Xbox 360's (shelf) life by delivering an adverse ruling in Motorola's ITC patent infringement case against Microsoft last year, the presiding Administrative Law Judge reversed his stance a couple months ago after prodding by the full Commission. While the finding of non-infringement was good news for Microsoft, the decision still needed to be OK'd by the Commission before the investigation could be officially closed. We thought we weren't going to get a final ruling until later in the summer, but the ITC apparently agreed with the ALJ's initial ruling ahead of schedule, and has decided not to review the decision today. As a result, the investigation is now closed, and this particular battle in the patent wars is finally over.

Update: Naturally Microsoft Corporate VP and deputy General Counsel David Howard is excited to see this case be closed, and issued the following statement:

This is a win for Xbox customers and confirms our view that Google had no grounds to block our products.

Filed under: Mobile, Microsoft, Google

Comments

Via: Reuters

Source: USITC [PDF]

The patent wars have grown long and tiresome for many, but Twitter's among the first to take meaningful action to stop them with its Innovator's Patent Agreement. Today, the company launched version 1.0 of the IPA and is using it for the first time. Patent number 8,448,084, which claims a method for refreshing a scrollable list of content (aka pull-to-refresh) is the first to get the IPA treatment, which means that Twitter has pledged to use this patent for defensive purposes only.

What's that mean? Well, under this version of the IPA, Twitter can assert claims against anyone who has filed, threatened or participated in a patent infringement suit against Twitter or any of its users, affiliates, customers, suppliers or distributors. It can also assert the patent to "deter a patent litigation threat" against Twitter and its peoples. If you're thinking that such a broad definition of "defensive purposes" means Twitter can pretty much use its IPA'd patents how it chooses, you're pretty much right. Still, we applaud Twitter's effort to pre-empt future patent litigation, but we'll have to wait and see if it accomplishes its goal of having companies spending their money on innovation instead of litigation.

Filed under: Software

Comments

Source: Official Twitter blog

It has the makings of a film -- but the fallout from one of the world's most sophisticated ATM heists is very real. The New York Times is reporting that a massive team of criminals worked in concert in order to grab some $45 million in a matter of hours over the course of two operations. The sheer scope of the project is hard to wrap one's mind around, involving trained personnel positioned in over two dozen countries.

Earlier today, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn "unsealed an indictment charging eight members of the New York crew, offering a glimpse into what the authorities said was one of the most sophisticated and effective cybercrime attacks ever uncovered." In essence, the hackers were able to infiltrate various credit card processing companies and raise withdrawal limits on prepaid accounts -- from there, cashing crews hit thousands of ATMs, socking away millions in the process. Hit up the source link for the full read; it's a wild one, for sure.

Filed under: Internet

Comments

Source: The New York Times

It was almost a year ago to the day that the European Commission began investigating Motorola over reported abuse of its standard-essential patents (SEPs), and now the regulators have a little more to say on the matter. The Commission has issued Motorola Mobility a Statement of Objections, which doesn't mean any judgment has been reached, but lets the company know its preliminary view, and it ain't good news. According to these initial findings, Motorola wanting an injunction against Apple in Germany based on some of its GPRS-related SEPs -- the particular legal encounter that was the catalyst for a complaint by Cupertino and ultimately, the EC's investigation -- "amounts to an abuse of a dominant position prohibited by EU antitrust rules." Motorola originally said it would license these patents under FRAND terms when they became standard-essential, which Apple was happy to pay for. However, the company pursued an injunction nonetheless.

The Commission's statement goes on to say that while injunctions can be necessary in certain disputes, where there is potential for an agreement under FRAND terms, companies with bulging SEP portfolios should not be allowed to request injunctions "in order to distort licensing negotiations and impose unjustified licensing terms on patent licensees." Joaquín Almunia, the Commission Vice President who's responsible for competition policy, echoed what we've heard from other important folks entrenched in the never-ending patent battlefield (such as Judge Koh), saying: "I think that companies should spend their time innovating and competing on the merits of the products they offer -- not misusing their intellectual property rights to hold up competitors to the detriment of innovation and consumer choice." So, what happens next? Motorola will first have its right to address the statement before the EC makes a final decision, but it's looking like a fine is headed the company's way. Hopefully, the outcome will also have a wider impact on patent cases of the future, so companies will spend more time making shiny things for us, and less on courtroom squabbles.

Filed under: Cellphones, Tablets, Mobile, Apple, Google

Comments

Via: Reuters

Source: European Commission

In a move which should surprise no one who's been following along, New York City livery car groups successfully won a bid yesterday afternoon for a temporary restraining order against New York City's smartphone-based hail pilot program ("e-hails," if you will). This effectively shuts down any (limited) plans UberTAXI and others had for getting back in business in Gotham -- both Uber and Hailo are being stopped from operating in NYC as a result. Under the pilot program -- approved earlier this year but mired in legal drama ever since -- services like Uber and Hailo could be used in NYC's approximately 13K yellow cabs. Livery cab businesses in NYC have sought to stop the program's implementation via legal means. Its latest effort, the "application for interim relief," was admitted via lawyer Randy Mastro of Gibson Dunn, and cites the following as its reason for the temporary restraining order:

"Absent emergency relief, petitioners and the public will suffer irreparable injury to their livelihoods, businesses and industry, fundamental rights and environmental interests, all of which will be impossible to remedy after this case is resolved in petitioner's favor."

Filed under: Cellphones, Transportation, Software

Comments

Via: Bloomberg

The online Aladdin's cave and AMA forum Reddit has revealed a revamped privacy policy intended to make clear exactly how it deals with users' data. Legalese is notably absent, with credit for that going to Lauren Gelman, a legal consultant who's previously worked with the likes of the EFF -- a member, like Reddit, of the Internet Defense League. Essentially, the new policy is geared towards allowing "your participation to remain as anonymous as you choose," with the website stating that any of your data won't be shared without consent, unless the law requires it. Even then, you will be notified, with the only exception being a court order that prevents it. Reddit also notes that deleting your account will remove your username from posts and comments, but they will remain on the site. As only the last edit performed stays on the servers, however, you could trek back through your history and strip everything out to finalize your departure. There's much more in the announcement post and full policy document over at the source links, in case you wanna have a read before it all kicks in on May 15th.

Filed under: Internet

Comments

Source: Reddit (1), (2)

In HTC and Nokia's ongoing patent litigation, one patent infringement claim against HTC was dismissed today by the District Court of Mannheim, Germany. The patent in question -- regarding "a communication network terminal for accessing internet" -- describes a "terminal" that can access the internet.

As FOSS Patents points out, today's dismissal was part of an ongoing collaboration between Google and Android phone makers who've been targeted by Nokia over claims against the Google Play store. "Nokia had alleged that Android's app architecture centered around the Google Play store infringes the '016 patent because of the way it allows third-party app developers to provide data to the end-user devices on which their programs run via a Google-operated server," the site notes. In that regard, today's dismissal marked a victory for Google beyond HTC -- though HTC issued a statement this afternoon exclaiming its "delight" over the court's ruling. Nokia has yet to return our request for comment.

Filed under: Cellphones, Handhelds, Software, Mobile, HTC, Nokia, Google

Comments

Source: FOSS Patents

Nokia's injunction yesterday has now been made a little more concrete. The Amsterdam district court has handed down a 10-month ban on STMicroelectronics selling its high-amplitude mics to anyone other than the Finnish phone maker. The same dual-membrane microphone is used in both the Lumia 720 and the HTC One, but Nokia (which co-developed and designed the component) had signed a 12-month exclusivity deal with the chipmaker -- a deal that STMicroelectronics apparently thought was only six months long.

According to All About Phones NL, the ruling won't halt sales of One devices already out there, with the court stating that HTC was "blameless" and that it couldn't have known about the contract between Nokia and STMicroelectronics. In short, you'll still be able to buy HTC's flagship in the Netherlands with those dual high-amp mics in tow -- at least for now. We've reached out to both companies for comment, but it's shaping up to be another parts supply woe for HTC's new smartphone.

Update: We've just heard from HTC on this, and its response is largely the same as yesterday's:

"HTC is disappointed in the decision. We are consulting with STM and will decide whether it is necessary to explore alternative solutions in due course. In the meanwhile, we do not expect this decision to have any immediate impact on our handset sales."

Filed under: Cellphones, HTC, Nokia

Comments

Via: All About Phones NL

Source: Amsterdam District Court filing

Don't worry, this time it's not a patent issue. However, it is more bad news for HTC's already-delayed One. Nokia has been granted an injunction by the Amsterdam district court concerning the technology HTC used in its current flagship. The legal battle involves a pair of high-amplitude mics housed within One's aluminum body, which are apparently the same dual-membrane components that Nokia's used in its recent Lumia 720, seen above.

The Finnish company recently applied for a preliminary injunction, pointing the finger at STMicroelectronics, which is responsible for manufacturing the mic for both Nokia and HTC. According to our source, the issue is likely to be a breach of an NDA between Nokia and STMicroelectronics, as the phone maker asserts that the "microphone components [were] invented by and manufactured exclusively for Nokia." We're still hearing new details and will update as we learn more. We've also reached out to HTC for comment. For now, you can read up on Nokia's statement following the court's decision, embedded after the break.

Update: HTC has offered up an official statement in response to the injunction: "HTC is disappointed in the decision. We are considering whether it will have any impact on our business and we will explore alternative solutions immediately."

Filed under: Cellphones, Wireless, Mobile, HTC, Nokia

Comments

Google's been taking heat for a number of years since its Street View cars were found to be pulling WiFi data, and the Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information has today hit the search giant with a 145,000 euro fine (almost $190,000) for its indiscretions. You may not remember this specific case in Germany -- it was nearly three years ago that investigations began, after all -- but it has now come to a close with this fine and the ruling that El Goog illegally recorded personal data including emails, passwords and pictures, which have all reportedly been deleted. We know the company has enough cash to pay in full, so the ruling will likely make more of a dent to its image than its bank account.

Filed under: Internet, Google

Comments

Via: PCWorld

Source: Hamburg's Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom

Miami U.S. District Judge Robert Scola had choice words for Apple and Samsung Google during a patent dispute between the pair, accusing the two of of having "no interest in efficiently and expeditiously resolving this dispute" and instead using such proceedings "as a business strategy." The Florida case began in 2010 and has since swelled to over 180 claims, causing the pair to ask the court to reduce the scope of the case. That caused Judge Scola to rail against the combatants, saying "without a hint of irony, the parties now ask the court to mop up a mess that they made," adding that he would "decline this invitation." Instead, he gave them four months to streamline the case themselves, lest it be placed on hold until all the nearly 100 terms in dispute are defined to everyone's satisfaction -- but we know how that's gone before.

Update: The original post mentioned Samsung and Apple as the disputants, but it's actually a suit involving Google and Apple. Thanks for all who pointed it out.

Filed under: Cellphones, Misc, Tablets, Apple, Samsung

Comments

Via: Games Industry International

Source: Bloomberg

Something tells us the US Court of Appeals for the Second District has no intentions to kid around with its latest decision, despite it coming down on the 1st of April. In what can only be viewed as a monumental victory for Aereo, the aforesaid court has just rejected an appeal from a smattering of TV networks that are hellbent on stopping the web-streaming company from treading on their territory. For those unaware, Aereo allows users to stream OTA television networks over the web, but this here court found that the system did not infringe on the broadcasters' copyrights. Of course, a battle at the Supreme Court level is a practical certainty, so it's definitely not out of the proverbial woods just yet.

That said, a separate Wall Street Journal report sheds light on ongoing discussions between the startup and some very established players in the industry -- if you can't beat 'em, join' em... right? As the story goes, AT&T, Dish Network and DirecTV have all spoken with Aereo as the company hopes to expand its footprint beyond New York City and the surrounding areas. On one hand, a mega-corp swallowing Aereo could lead to near-instant demise for its technologies, but given the right owner, it could provide the disruption the pay-TV sector so badly needs.

Filed under: Home Entertainment, HD

Comments

Via: TechCrunch, The Verge

Source: US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit [PDF], WSJ

Microsoft and Motorola's spat in the International Trade Commission started way back in 2010, but it looks like the case may be finally drawing to a conclusion after an initial ruling in Moto's favor was remanded for a second look. Reuters reports that on remand, the presiding administrative law judge reversed his stance in a new initial determination, clearing Microsoft of the remaining infringement charge for patent number 6,069,896 on wireless peer-to-peer technology. In response to this bit of good news, Microsoft VP Corporate VP and deputy general counsel had this to say:

We are pleased with the Administrative Law Judge's finding that Microsoft did not violate Motorola's patent and are confident that this determination will be affirmed by the Commission.

Back in October of last year, Motorola dropped the two WiFi-related patents it had asserted against Microsoft, and in January of 2013 it dropped both of its H.264 related patents from the ITC proceeding. With this latest ruling, it looks like Microsoft will escape from the ITC scott free, though it's not out of the woods yet, as the final call from the full commission won't occur until July. And, of course, Motorola can always take things to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should it choose to do so. Isn't the system of endless appeals that is the United States judicial system wonderful?

Filed under: Gaming, Wireless, HD, Microsoft, Google

Comments

Via: Reuters

Source: ITC Notice [PDF]

Weary of the neverending legal back-and-forth between Apple and Samsung yet? No, we're not either (that's a terrible lie), and the latest exciting development comes from a courtroom in Japan, where it was decided Samsung does not hold rights to certain data transmission tech it accused Apple of pinching. So, what are the repercussions? None, really -- the status quo remains unchanged, and Apple can continue selling the products Sammy wanted off the shelf. The Times of India notes that cases in the US and South Korea over the same patent have gone one a piece, meaning Apple is up 2-1 in this particular bout. But, when you've been battling for this long, you've bound to win some, and lose just as many.

Filed under: Cellphones, Mobile, Apple, Samsung

Comments

Source: Reuters

Thinking about beefing up your IP profile? Try giving IBM a call. For twenty consecutive years, it's been awarded more patents than any other company. According to IFI Claims Patent Services, IBM was issued 6,478 patents in 2012. To put things into perspective, its closest competitor, Samsung, trailed Big Blue by nearly 1,500 patents. No small wonder the company is the tech world's intellectual property broker.

Some of the year's biggest patent warriors made the top 50 list too. Both Apple and Google's patent awards grew significantly over previous years, surpassing 2011's numbers by 68 and 170 percent, respectively. The house that T.J. Waston built, on the other hand, grew only a meager 4.8 percent. Still, with patents in health, banking, defense, social networking, cloud computing and beyond, IBM probably has a few years left at the top. Ever onward, IBM. Ever onward.

Filed under: Misc

Comments

Via: CNET, NYT

Source: IFI Claims

Google's drawn the ire of the Federal Trade Commission for myriad reasons over the past year, and so the FTC began a formal investigation into those transgressions. Today, Chairman Jon Leibowitz announced that the investigation has concluded with a settlement after the FTC found several issues with the way Big G does business. Head on past the break for a full rundown of the FTC's findings.

Filed under: Internet, Google

Comments

Source: FTC, Google Official Blog

Apple's patent claim against Samsung's Galaxy S III mini is no more, with Cupertino citing the phone's lacking availability in the US for the amendment to its original November filing. In the ongoing litigation between the two electronics giants, Samsung argued that it's Galaxy S III mini didn't warrant inclusion in the latest volley of Samsung devices Apple wants added to its patent lawsuit; Apple apparently agreed, and is thusly withdrawing its claim against that particular device. The argument also highlights the sad news that the S III mini won't join Samsung's Galaxy lineup in the US.

An agreement filing spotted by Reuters from a San Jose, CA. US District Court revealed today's news, coming just days after Judge Lucy Koh dismissed a request to permanently ban sales on several Samsung devices. It's unclear if the other Samsung devices Apple asked to be added to the ongoing case are approved yet by the court, but we can certainly count the S III mini out for the time being.

Filed under: Cellphones, Mobile, Samsung, Acer

Comments

Source: Reuters

We knew Netflix was big, but big enough to change the law? Apparently so, as an amendment to the Video Privacy Protection Act backed by the streaming service has been cleared by the US Senate. If the alteration gets a final sign-off from Obama himself, it'll allow Netflix users to easily share their streaming activity on Facebook -- something already implemented in regions outside the US. The current law, which makes such sharing tricky, was passed in the late 80's after a judge saw his video rental history leaked to a newspaper. There wasn't anything embarrassing in this list, but the episode begat the Act which requires a person's legal consent every time there's a request to publish such data. Instead, Netflix is proposing a one-off authorization which streamlines the whole process. We imagine the president's signature is just a formality, in which case you'll soon know exactly how many times we've watched Step Up 2: The Streets.

Filed under: Home Entertainment, Internet, HD, Facebook

Comments

Via: TechCrunch

Source: Bloomberg

Nokia and RIM have decided to make nice (at least after the BlackBerry maker lost some patent scuffles) and are withdrawing any pending legal action in the US, UK and Canada. Instead, RIM will be making both a one-off and on-going payments to Espoo. Although the exact amount it'll be costing the Canadian company is still confidential, it's something that's also likely to affect its next earnings report.

Filed under: Cellphones, Mobile, Nokia, Blackberry

Comments

Source: Nokia

As a dreaded accounting scandal continues to drag Olympus' name through the mud, federal agents in the United States arrested yet another gentleman in connection with the firm's alleged fraud. Chan Ming Fon, a citizen of Taiwan, was reportedly arrested in Los Angeles today. As the story goes, he was a former bank executive in the company, and he received some $10 million for his assistance in keeping nearly $2 billion in losses from surfacing. Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, said the following: "As alleged, Chan Ming Fon was handsomely paid to play an international shell game with hundreds of millions of dollars of assets in order to allow Olympus to keep a massive accounting fraud going for years." But hey, troubles aside, at least we've got an E-5 sequel coming next year! Distractions! Huzzah!

Filed under: Cameras

Comments

Via: The New York Times

Source: FBI

The name of Taiwanese display manufacturer AU Optronics is rarely out of the courts when LCD price fixing is involved, and now another of the company's heavyweights has been convicted for the part he played in such crimes. The US Department of Justice announced that Shiu Lung Leung, formerly a senior manager at AUO, has been found guilty for his role in a "conspiracy" which artificially raised the prices of LCD-packing gear in the US. From 2002 through to 2006, Leung is said to have been privy to secret monthly meetings with his company's competitors, where they discussed price fixing (and presumably, sinister cat stroking) in "hotel conference rooms, karaoke bars and tea rooms." Leung joins a couple of other AUO execs and many from different companies who've received similar judgments, and when sentenced, could face up to a dime in the slammer and a hefty fine -- although we doubt any of that cash will be put towards a long-overdue rebate.

Filed under: Displays

Comments

Via: The Register

Source: US Department of Justice

Apple and Motorola's patent spat at the ITC has been dragging on for months, with Moto getting a favorable infringement ruling early on -- but it seems that Apple will be ending the year on a legal high note. That aforementioned win by MMI was overturned in August, when the Commission found that Apple had not, in fact, infringed one of Motorola's WiFi patents. In making that ruling, the Commission remanded the case to Judge Pender and asked him to revisit his finding of non-infringement on a separate, touch UI patent at issue.

Today, Pender finished that task, making an Initial Determination on Remand that, while Apple's products infringe the patent claim in question, there is no violation because said claim is invalid. Why the finding of invalidity? Well, Pender found that the claim is anticipated by another, older patent that's owned by Motorola, but not asserted in the action. This undoubtedly brings good tidings to Apple's legal department, as it could mean this fight with Moto (as opposed to all the others) is coming to an end. That said, Motorola isn't bereft of holiday hope -- it can still appeal Pender's latest ruling.

Filed under: Mobile, Apple, Google

Comments

Via: Bloomberg

Source: ITC Ruling [PDF]

Were you among the many put off or freaked out by Instagram's changes to its Terms of Service announced yesterday? You're not alone, as many informed the Facebook photo sharing platform that they weren't pleased by the new language -- they mistook it as a means for their photos to be monetized in unscrupulous ways. Good news is, Instagram heard these complaints and has responded, explaining the changes and pledging to nix parts that caused unnecessary confusion.

In a blog post today, co-founder Kevin Systrom made clear that the ToS tweaks were meant to inform Instagrammers that the company wants "to experiment with innovative advertising." What kind of advertising? Say a company wants more folks following its Instagram account. According to Systrom, the changes allow Instagram to see which of the people you follow also follow that business and can use that information to better promote said company.

Basically, the changes were made so Instagram can find ways to increase ad revenue without spoiling the UX with banner ads, but the service still retains the rights to use your information in ads -- and yes, even users under 18 are included. Additionally, Systrom made clear that users own their content and Instagram will not be selling user photos to advertisers. And, he has pledged that updated language to that effect is in the works. Still uneasy about using Instagram for your filtered photography needs? Head on over to the source for the full explanation straight from Systrom himself.

Filed under: Internet, Mobile, Facebook

Comments

Source: Instagram Blog