Technically Legal

HP and Lexmark Sue over Ink Jet Cartridges, again, Facebook Sued over Kids Liking ads, iPad and People

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed.  Feel free to e-mail us with comments and suggestions.

HP and Lexmark sue over Ink Jet Cartridges

Lexmark, HP Using Patent Law To Try To Block Replacement Ink Cartridges From The Market
Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc.
HP guns for printer ink competition
Lexmark sues 24 cartridge makers over patents

Facebook Sued over Kids Liking Ads

Lawsuit Says Teens Should Not Be Allowed To Like Ads On Facebook
Facebook Offers Exhibit A In Its Defense Against Teen Lawsuit

People Magazine and the iPad

iPad News: People Magazine Launches Delayed App
17 USC 106

Comment on this post Posted in: Podcast on August 30, 2010

Apple gets a couple of scary design patents, AT&T thinks wireless is different, and Oracle sues the Java out of Google.

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed.  Feel free to e-mail us with comments and suggestions.

Apple Design Patents

Article (via TUAW)

Patent #s: D621848, D621849

AT&T on Net Neutrality

AT&T’s Statement

Oracle (d/b/a Sun) Sues Google Over Java (N.D.CA, No. 1418106)

Article (via Tech Crunch)

Complaint

Ben and David Lu!! are MIA this week.

2^6

Comment on this post Posted in: Podcast on August 23, 2010

The blogosphere was abuzz today with the news that Apple was awarded two patents. One was for slide to unlock, the other for virtual keyboard keys popping up when you tap them.

Both of these, however, were design patents, and not utility patents. That means that other people can implement the same features, as long as they don’t look substantially similar to Apple’s implementation.

Think of design patents more of trademarks than regular patents. This just keeps people from making a lock screen that’s so similar to the iPhone that it will risk confusing people.

Comments Off Posted in: Links on August 17, 2010

Does Net Neutrality Violate the Constitution, Are Verizon and Google Making Back Room Deals, Apple Copies an App in a Patent Filing

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed.  Feel free to e-mail us with comments and suggestions.

Google and Verizon Rumored to have Made Back Room Deal

Google and Verizon Near Deal on Web Pay Tiers
Google’s Response
Verizon’s Response
Ed Markey on Net Neutrality: FCC needs to act quickly

Apple Copies App in Patent Filing

The patent case we haven’t called

Does Net Neutrality Violate the Constitution

Does Net Neutrality Violate the Fifth Amendment?
No, The Fifth Amendment Does Not Complicate Net Neutrality
Virtual Takings: The Coming Fifth Amendment Challenge to Net Neutrality Regulation

1 Comment Posted in: Podcast on August 9, 2010

Google and YouTube win First Round, Congress Can Take Works out of the Public Domain, Apple Sharing Location Data

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed. Feel free to e-mail us with questions, suggestions or comments.

Google, YouTube Win First Round Against Viacom

The Opinon

Congress Can Take Works Out of Public Domain

Terrible News: Court Says It’s Okay To Remove Content From The Public Domain And Put It Back Under Copyright
The Opinion

Apple Sharing iPhone Location Data

Apple Now Storing and Sharing Your Location With Others
Congressmen Ask Apple To Explain Privacy Policy Changes
Lawmakers To Introduce New Internet Privacy Bill

Comments Off Posted in: Podcast on June 28, 2010

Apple revises their advertising policy, Traffic Cam Gripe Site, New York Times Demands Apple Takedown a RSS Reader App

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed. Feel free to e-mail us with questions, suggestions or comments.

Apple Revises Rules for in App Advertising

Apple revises iOS rules on outside advertisers, cuts out Google, Adobe by implication
FTC Preps Investigation Against Apple’s Ad Tactics
Apple’s Mobile Rules To Get FTC Scrutiny

Traffic Cam Gripe Site

Anti-speed camera activist nabs Bluff City PD’s expiring web domain
Bluff City, TN Speed Camera information
UDRP Policy

NY Times Demands App Takedown

New York Times to iPad App Developers: Hands Off Our RSS
NYT demands Pulse app be pulled from App Store
Pulse app cheered, then pulled, now back
The Takedown Notices

Comments Off Posted in: Podcast on June 14, 2010

Twitter to Sell Trademarked Ad Terms, Senators Call to End Privacy Of Pre-Paid Phones, Apple v. GPL

Please download the podcast or subscribe to the feed. Feel free to e-mail us with questions, suggestions or comments.

Twitter to Sell Trademarked Ad Terms

Twitter May Allow Competitors to Purchase Trademarks as Keywords for Sponsored Tweets

Senators Call to End Privacy of Pre-Paid Phones

Senators call for end to anonymous, prepaid cell phones

Apple v. GPL

GPL Enforcement in Apple’s App Store
More about the App Store GPL Enforcement

Comments Off Posted in: Podcast on May 31, 2010

This is a bizarre story. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) issued a press release about an unnamed third party developer who released an unnamed third party application via the iTunes App store. This unnamed program uses GPL code, and is itself a port of GNU Go. So the FSF sent a letter to Apple asking Apple to bring the App Store in complaince with the GPL.

The FSF press release also indicates that they’re in talks with the application developer for violating the GPL, but they’re also implying that Apple is somehow at fault. The FSF’s theory is that Apple, by distributing this code in a non-GPL-compliant way, is also violating the GPL.

This would probably fail under a contract theory of the GPL, because there’s no evidence that Apple knew the underlying code was subject to the GPL. However, Apple cannot claim ignorance to insulate themselves from liability for copyright infringement. The safeharbor provisions of the DMCA would provide Apple protection from liability on that front, which explains why they took the application off the store as soon as they had knowledge of the infringing nature of the product.

Update: Another good reason why Apple wouldn’t be liable for breach of contract, is that they were not a party to the contract. Unless the game had the GPL as a license agreement (unlikely), and the iPhone App approval agent clicked “OK,” the FSF would have a tough time proving that Apple was party to the GPL here. Even if all of that were true, it wouldn’t be an open and shut case.

Comments Off Posted in: Commentary on May 26, 2010

The FTC announced today that it had approved Google’s acquisition of AdMob, an advertising service for mobile devices. From the FTC’s press release:

[A]lthough the combination of the two leading mobile advertising networks raised serious antitrust issues, the agency’s concerns ultimately were overshadowed by recent developments in the market, most notably a move by Apple Computer Inc. – the maker of the iPhone – to launch its own, competing mobile ad network. In addition, a number of firms appear to be developing or acquiring smartphone platforms to better compete against Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android, and these firms would have a strong incentive to facilitate competition among mobile advertising networks.

I can’t recall a time when an announced, but yet unreleased, product or service has stopped the FTC from trying to block an acquisition. But, in reality, by the time this would have been litigated, the market probably would have changed enough to make the antitrust concerns moot.

Comments Off Posted in: Links on May 21, 2010

According to Groklaw, Psystar has filed their appeal to the Ninth Circuit via mail under seal.

I have to admit, I’m starting to feel a bit lethargic when it comes to the progression of the Apple v. Psystar case(s).   If you’re lost, check out the full docket at Groklaw.  This all relates back to the Psystar’s 2008 sale of non-Apple-labeled computers, fully loaded with Apple’s OS X.  This was brazenly done in (apparent) violation of Apple’s End-User License Agreement (“EULA”) which prohibits third-party installations to non-Apple hardware.  Apple wasn’t as excited as the rest of the technology blogosphere and filed suit in the Northern District of California.

Psystar brought up a number of interesting legal arguments about the enforceability of EULAs, in spite of well established case law contrary to their theories, and took some heavy damage in the District Court.  The result was a partial settlement (for $2.7M), a permanent injunction, and a summary judgment granted in favor of Apple.

Now enters the appeal.  Since the opening brief is filed under seal, we don’t know what they are planning on arguing, and we won’t have any idea if the Ninth Circuit will even hear the case for some period of time.

Hat tips (and belated birthday wishes) go to Groklaw for their extensive coverage on all things Psystar.

Comments Off Posted in: Links on May 18, 2010