St. Louis-based grocery chain Schnuck Markets has claimed that a potential class action lawsuit filed against it in an Illinois state court over a recent data breach really belongs in federal court because of the case’s scope and damages involved
Computerworld News
Tag Archives: Court
Schnucks wants federal court to handle data breach lawsuit
Posted by Gsurface
on May 25, 2013
No comments
Fed. Appeals Court Says Police Need Warrant to Search Phone
Posted by Gsurface
on May 18, 2013
No comments
An anonymous reader writes “In a decision that’s almost certainly going to result in this issue heading up to the Supreme Court, the Federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals [Friday] ruled that police can’t search your phone when they arrest you without a warrant. That’s contrary to most courts’ previous findings in these kinds of cases where judges have allowed warrantless searches through cell phones.” (But in line with the recently mentioned decision in Florida, and seemingly with common sense.)
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Yahoo wins appeal of $2.7 billion suit in Mexican court
Posted by Gsurface
on May 17, 2013
No comments
An appeals court in Mexico has overturned an approximately US$ 2.7 billion judgment against Yahoo and Yahoo Mexico in a breach-of-contract suit concerning online directories.
Computerworld News
German case on embedding YouTube videos referred to EU court
Posted by Gsurface
on May 16, 2013
No comments
Embedded YouTube videos don't infringe copyright under current German law, but they could violate European rules, the German Federal Court of Justice said on Thursday.
Computerworld News
Court orders names to be withheld before release of Aaron Swartz records
Posted by Gsurface
on May 14, 2013
No comments
A U.S. federal court has modified a protective order to allow disclosure of the court records of Internet activist Aaron Swartz, but ruled that names and other personal identifying information of those involved in his arrest and prosecution should be redacted.
Computerworld News
How Colleges Are Pushing Out the Poor To Court the Rich
Posted by Gsurface
on May 13, 2013
No comments
An anonymous reader writes “A change from ‘need’ based financial aid to a ‘merit’ based system coupled with a ‘high tuition, high aid,’ model is making it harder for poor students to afford college. According to The Atlantic: ‘Sometimes, colleges (and states) really are just competing to outbid each other on star students. But there are also economic incentives at play, particularly for small, endowment-poor institutions. “After all,” Burd writes, “it’s more profitable for schools to provide four scholarships of $ 5,000 each to induce affluent students who will be able to pay the balance than it is to provide a single $ 20,000 grant to one low-income student.” The study notes that, according to the Department of Education’s most recent study, 19 percent of undergrads at four-year colleges received merit aid despite scoring under 700 on the SAT. Their only merit, in some cases, might well have been mom and dad’s bank account.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Appeals court ruling could be ‘death’ of software patents
Posted by Gsurface
on May 11, 2013
No comments
A U.S. appeals court has ruled that an abstract idea is not patentable simply because it is tied to a computer system, signaling what one judge described as the "death" of software and business method patents.
Computerworld News
Apple’s use of “iBooks” isn’t trademark infringement, says court
Posted by Gsurface
on May 10, 2013
No comments
Apple began using the term “iBook” quite a few years ago, having applied it to various computers in days-gone-by that are now obsolete, only recently shifting to a slight variation of the word for its digital books app. Such a change prompted John T. Colby, a New York publisher, to file a lawsuit against Apple
German Court Rejects Apple’s Privacy Policy
Posted by Gsurface
on May 8, 2013
No comments
redletterdave writes “A German court rejected eight out of 15 provisions in Apple’s general privacy policy and terms of data use on Tuesday, claiming that the practices of the Cupertino, Calif. company deviate too much from German laws (Google translation of German original). According to German law, recognized consumer groups can sue companies over illegal terms and conditions. Apple asks for ‘global consent’ to use customer data on its website, but German law insists that clients know specific details about what their data will be used for and why.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Court sides with Microsoft over Motorola patents used in Xbox
Posted by Gsurface
on April 26, 2013
No comments
Judge determines Motorola is entitled to $ 1.8 million in royalty rates for patents used in Xbox — not the $ 4 billion it had sought. [Read more]
     |
Washington court rules Motorola can get millions, not billions, from Microsoft for its patents
Posted by Gsurface
on April 26, 2013
No comments
Among the many patent cases currently ongoing between Motorola and Microsoft is one in US District Court in the state of Washington concerning standards-essential WiFi and h.264 patents. AllThingsD reports that while Motorola was requesting billions in royalties for the technology it owns, Judge James Robart — who invalidated a number of its patent claims a few months ago — ruled it’s entitled to around $ 2 million per year. The reason given? There’s so many patents in play, the judge determined that the amount Motorola sought would cost more than the Xbox 360 they’re being implemented in, and also that it hadn’t proven its patents were more valuable than those of other companies included in the same pool. All 207 pages of the decision are available beyond the source link if need more info on the hows and whys of today’s decision.
Filed under: Gaming, Microsoft
Source: AllThingsD
Ban on iOS push mail stays but its patent likely invalid, German court says
Posted by Gsurface
on April 24, 2013
No comments
A patent that Motorola Mobility used to force Apple to turn off its iCloud push mail service in Germany is likely to be invalid, the Higher Regional Court in Karlsruhe said on Wednesday — but the ban will not be lifted, a court spokeswoman said.
Computerworld News
Google Video trial to continue to Italian supreme court
Posted by Gsurface
on April 17, 2013
No comments
Three Google executives are heading back to court in Italy, where the prosecutor has appealed their acquittal on charges of allowing a video to be posted in breach of Italy's privacy laws, one of the Google execs involved said on Wednesday.
Computerworld News
Will the Supreme Court End Human Gene Patents?
Posted by Gsurface
on April 15, 2013
No comments
An anonymous reader writes “Monday, the Supreme Court will hear a case on the validity of breast cancer gene patents. The court has a chance to end human gene patents after three decades. From the article: ‘Since the 1980s, patent lawyers have been claiming pieces of humanity’s genetic code. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has granted thousands of gene patents. The Federal Circuit, the court that hears all patent appeals, has consistently ruled such patents are legal. But the judicial winds have been shifting. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the legality of gene patents. And recently, the Supreme Court has grown increasingly skeptical of the Federal Circuit’s patent-friendly jurisprudence. Meanwhile, a growing number of researchers, health care providers, and public interest groups have raised concerns about the harms of gene patents. The American Civil Liberties Union estimates that more than 40 percent of genes are now patented. Those patents have created “patent thickets” that make it difficult for scientists to do genetic research and commercialize their results. Monopolies on genetic testing have raised prices and reduced patient options.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
EFF Urges Court To Protect Privacy of Text Messages
Posted by Gsurface
on April 10, 2013
No comments
netbuzz writes “The police in Washington state arrested a suspected drug dealer, rummaged through the text messages on his phone, responded to one message while pretending to be the suspect, arranged a meeting, and then arrested the recipient of the text — all without a warrant. The state argues – and an appeals court majority agreed – that both suspects had neither a legal expectation of privacy nor Fourth Amendment protection because both considerations evaporate the moment that any text message arrives on any phone. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is urging the state’s Supreme Court to overturn that decision and recognize that ‘text messages are the 21st Century phone call.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
California court: Hands on the wheel, not on your maps app
Posted by Gsurface
on April 6, 2013
No comments
In the Golden State, fiddling with your mapping app while driving is just as bad — and illegal — as typing out a text message or holding your phone to your ear, a judge rules. [Read more]
CNET News
Court: Aereo TV Rebroadcast Is Still Legal
Posted by Gsurface
on April 3, 2013
No comments
Maximum Prophet writes “While Redigi is illegal, Aereo, the service that allows users to time-shift over-the-air TV programming, isn’t. ‘We conclude that Aereo’s transmissions of unique copies of broadcast television programs created at its users’ requests and transmitted while the programs are still airing on broadcast television are not ‘public performances’ of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works,’ said the ruling (PDF). Of course, both decisions are going to be appealed. ‘The outcome also answers the question, at least momentarily, of whether online television would be controlled by a stodgy industry that once shunned the VCR, or whether third-party innovators embracing technological advances have a chance to build on the openness of public airwaves. … Aereo’s technological setup, the court found, basically allows it to do what cable companies could not: retransmit broadcast airwaves without paying licensing fees. In short, the Aereo service is as legal as somebody putting an antenna on top of their house to capture broadcast signals. The court said Aereo “provides the functionality of three devices: a standard TV antenna, a DVR, and a Slingbox” device. “Each of these devices is legal, so it stands to reason that a service that combines them is also legal. Only in the world of copyright maximalists do people need to get special permission to watch over-the-air television with an antenna,” said John Bergmayer, an attorney with the digital-rights group Public Knowledge. “Just because ‘the internet’ is involved doesn’t change this.”‘”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Indian Supreme Court Denies Novartis Cancer Drug Patent
Posted by Gsurface
on April 2, 2013
No comments
beltsbear writes “Following a reasonable view of drug patents, the Indian courts have decided that making small changes to an existing patented drug are not worthy of a new patent. This ruling makes way for low cost Indian cancer drugs that will save lives. From the Article: ‘Novartis lost a six-year legal battle after the court ruled that small changes and improvements to the drug Glivec did not amount to innovation deserving of a patent. The ruling opens the way for generic companies in India to manufacture and sell cheap copies of the drug in the developing world and has implications for HIV and other modern drugs too.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
MIT Files Court Papers “Partially” Opposing Release Of Documents About Aaron Swartz Investigation
Posted by Gsurface
on March 30, 2013
No comments
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is “partially” opposing a request by the estate of Aaron Swartz for the release of documents related to the investigation that led to Swartz arrest and prosecution in federal court. In court papers filed today, MIT counsel states that its opposition stems from two factors: its concerns about people in the MIT community named in the documents and the security of its computer networks. MIT has previously stated that it would release the documents with redactions of names and other information. MIT President L. Rafael Reif said in email to the MIT community earlier this month: On Friday, the lawyers for Aaron Swartz’s estate filed a legal request with the Boston federal court where the Swartz case would have gone to trial. They demanded that the court release to the public information related to the case, including many MIT documents. Some of these documents contain information about vulnerabilities in MIT’s network. Some contain the names of individual MIT employees involved. In fact, the lawyers’ request argues that those names cannot be excluded (”redacted”) from the documents and urges that they be released in the public domain and delivered to Congress. The paper filed today reiterate this position, basing it on threats already made to MIT staff and three separate hacking incidents at the university. The information includes “email, the names, job titles, departments, telephone numbers, email addresses, business addresses, and other identifying information of many members of the MIT community.” Swartz has become a symbol in the Internet community since his suicide. His supporters have led to debate about the role MIT played in Swartz prosecution and the vigilance of the U.S. Attorney General in the case. MIT claims it is fully cooperating in the investigation that has come since Swartz suicide.
TechCrunch
Apple lands in Chinese court to battle Siri patent suit
Posted by Gsurface
on March 27, 2013
No comments
With a pre-trial hearing today, the case pits Apple against Zhizhen Network Technology, which claims a patent for the voice recognition software used by Siri. [Read more]
CNET News
March Madness Gets A Full Court Press From The Tech World, As Pickmoto, IFTTT, & More Cater To Hoop Lovers Online
Posted by Gsurface
on March 21, 2013
No comments
As you’ve no doubt heard by now, March Madness is upon us, with the NCAA tournament officially kicking off tomorrow. Yes, March Madness brings April gladness, as the saying goes. In fact, difficult as it may be to fathom, but the NCAA men’s basketball tournament is turning 75-years-young in 2013. Supreme Court Upholds First Sale Doctrine
Posted by Gsurface
on March 19, 2013
No comments
langelgjm writes “In a closely-watched case, the U.S. Supreme Court today vindicated the first-sale doctrine, declaring that it “applies to copies of a copyrighted work lawfully made abroad.” The case involved a Thai graduate student in the U.S. who sold cheap foreign versions of textbooks on eBay without the publisher’s permission. The 6-3 decision has important implications for goods sold online and in discount stores. Justice Stephen Breyer said in his opinion (PDF) that the publisher lost any ability to control what happens to its books after their first sale abroad.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Jammie Thomas Denied Supreme Court Appeal
Posted by Gsurface
on March 19, 2013
No comments
sarysa writes “The Supreme Court has refused to hear the latest appeal of the 7 year old Jammie Thomas case, regarding a single mother who was fined $ 222,000 in her most recent appeal for illegally sharing 24 songs. Those of us hoping for an Eighth Amendment battle over this issue will not be seeing it anytime soon. In spite of the harsh penalties, the journalist suggests that: ‘Still, the RIAA is sensitive about how it looks if they impoverish a woman of modest means. Look for them to ask her for far less than the $ 222,000.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Supreme Court declines to hear petition over $222,000 music piracy judgment
Posted by Gsurface
on March 18, 2013
No comments
Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a Minnesota woman who has been fighting for years to reverse a $ 222,000 judgment for music piracy, finally ran out of legal appeals on Monday after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear her petition for a review of the case.
Computerworld News
Virnetx Loses Court Battle To Cisco Over VPN Patent
Posted by Gsurface
on March 17, 2013
No comments
schneidafunk writes “VirnetX, a patent-licensing firm with 14 employees, has seen its stock price fall after it lost a major patent trial in Texas on Thursday. A jury there ruled that Cisco did not infringe VirnetX’s patents on virtual private networks (VPNs), and that the networking giant didn’t have to pay $ 258 million in damages.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
iFone seeks damages from Apple after Mexican Supreme Court upholds ruling
Posted by Gsurface
on March 16, 2013
No comments
In 2003, a Mexican telecommunications company trademarked the name “iFone,” which sounds the same as a certain handset we’ve all come to know and some of us have come to love. Apple went after iFone in 2009, attempting to have its trademark revoked under claims that it had expired and was too similar to “iPhone“.
Retailer hauls Visa to court over $13.3M fine for payment card data breach
Posted by Gsurface
on March 14, 2013
No comments
Genesco, a specialty retailer of footwear, sports apparel and related accessories has sued Visa USA for $ 13.3 million in fines that were assessed against the company after a credit card data breach in 2010.
Computerworld News
European Human Rights Court Rejects Pirate Bay Founders’ Appeal
Posted by Gsurface
on March 13, 2013
No comments
A bit over a year since having their case rejected by the Swedish Supreme Court and appealing to the European Human Rights Court, it looks like basically all legal options have been exhausted for the Pirate Bay Founders: their case has been rejected. From the article: “The EHCR recognizes that the Swedish verdict interferes with the right to freedom of expression, but ruled that this was necessary to protect the rights of copyright holders. In its decision the Court also considered the fact that The Pirate Bay did not remove torrents linking to copyrighted material when they were asked to ‘The Court held that sharing, or allowing others to share files of this kind on the Internet, even copyright-protected material and for profit-making purposes, was covered by the right to “receive and impart information” under Article 10 … However, the Court considered that the domestic courts had rightly balanced the competing interests at stake – i.e. the right of the applicants to receive and impart information and the necessity to protect copyright – when convicting the applicants and therefore rejected their application as manifestly ill-founded.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Android does not infringe on Nokia patent, German court rules
Posted by Gsurface
on March 8, 2013
No comments
The Android operating system has been cleared of patent infringement in a case brought by Nokia against Android smartphone maker HTC.
Computerworld News
UK Court Orders Block of Three Torrent Sites
Posted by Gsurface
on March 4, 2013
No comments
angry tapir writes “A court in the U.K. has ordered key Internet service providers in the country to block three torrent sites on a complaint from music labels including EMI Records and Sony Music. The High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, ordered six ISPs including Virgin Media, British Telecommunications and British Sky Broadcasting to block H33t, Kickass Torrents and Fenopy.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
High Court Orders UK ISPs To Block More Torrent Sites
Posted by Gsurface
on February 28, 2013
No comments
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from TorrentFreak: “The website blocking phenomenon has continued today in the UK, with the High Court adding three major torrent sites to the country’s unofficial ban list. Following complaints from the music industry led by the BPI, the Court ordered the UK’s leading Internet service providers to begin censoring subscriber access to Kickass Torrents, H33T and Fenopy.” Unlike when the Pirate Bay was blocked, none of the ISPs contested this. They did, however, refuse to block things without a court order. Looks like the flood gates have been opened. On the topic of filesharing, Japan arrested 27 file sharers, using the recent changes to their copyright law that allow criminal charges to be brought against file sharers.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Supreme Court Disallows FISA Challenges
Posted by Gsurface
on February 27, 2013
No comments
New submitter ThatsNotPudding writes “The U.S. Supreme court has rejected pleas to allow any challenges to the FISA wiretapping law unless someone can prove they’ve been harmed by it. ‘The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, was originally designed to allow spying on the communications of foreign powers. But after the September 11 attacks, FISA courts were authorized to target a wide array of international communications, including communications between Americans and foreigners. … In this case, the plaintiffs’ groups said their communications were likely being scooped up by the government’s expanded spying powers in violation of their constitutional rights. Today’s decision, a 5-4 vote along ideological lines by the nation’s highest court, definitively ends their case. In an opinion (PDF) by Justice Samuel Alito, the court ruled that these groups don’t have the right to sue at all, because they can’t prove they were being spied on.’” Further coverage at SCOTUSblog.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Federal Court OKs Amazon’s System of Suggesting Alternative Products
Posted by Gsurface
on February 26, 2013
No comments
concealment writes “Many of us have had the experience of going to Amazon to buy one thing but checking out with a huge shopping cart of items that we didn’t initially seek—or even know were available. Amazon’s merchandising often benefits Amazon’s customers, but trademark owners who lose sales to their competition due to it aren’t as thrilled. Fortunately for Amazon, a California federal court recently upheld Amazon’s merchandising practices in its internal search results.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Australian court assigns second judge to Apple-Samsung trial
Posted by Gsurface
on February 26, 2013
No comments
The patent trial in Australia between Apple and Samsung Electronics has become so complex that a second judge has been assigned to the case.
Computerworld News
Data Espionage Sleuths Aim to Put Chinese Corporations in Court
Posted by Gsurface
on February 26, 2013
No comments
CrowdStrike says it can help U.S. companies identify the companies that benefit from stolen data.
In recent years, computer security companies and even U.S. government officials have alleged that attackers in China and elsewhere routinely steal company secrets from U.S. corporate computers. But tracing the perpetrators of such breaches and showing which companies may have received the data copied is extremely difficult. Now a startup company, CrowdStrike, has developed tools that it says can track attacks in enough detail for victims to publicly accuse those benefiting. The companies can then take legal action or lobby for international trade sanctions.
Court backs Einhorn bit to stop Apple proxy vote
Posted by Gsurface
on February 22, 2013
No comments
Legal victory for hedge fund manager’s bid to convince Apple to share more of its wealth with investors. [Read more]
CNET News
Facebook Can Keep Real Name Policy, German Court Rules
Posted by Gsurface
on February 16, 2013
No comments
An anonymous reader writes “Facebook can stick with its real name policy in Germany, and doesn’t have to allow nicknames on its platform for now. The regulator that ordered Facebook to change its policy based its orders on inapplicable German law, a German court ruled.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Facebook wins court battle against German privacy watchdog over ban on using fake names
Posted by Gsurface
on February 16, 2013
No comments
Facebook has won a court battle against a German privacy watchdog that challenged the social networking site’s policy requiring users to register with their real names.
FOX News
Australian Federal Court Rules For Patent Over Breast Cancer Gene
Posted by Gsurface
on February 15, 2013
No comments
Bulldust writes “Federal Court in Australia has ruled in favor of US biotechnology company Myriad Genetics enabling them to continue to hold the patent over the so-called breast cancer gene BRCA1. The same patent is also being reconsidered by the US Supreme Court in the current session. From the article: ‘Federal court Justice John Nicholas has ruled that a private company can continue to hold a patent over the so-called breast cancer gene BRCA1, in a decision that has devastated cancer victims.The decision is the first in Australia to rule on whether isolated genes can be patented, and will set a precedent in favor of commercial ownership of genetic material.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
U.S. District Court Dismisses Suit In Facebook IPO, Says Company Disclosed Risks
Posted by Gsurface
on February 14, 2013
No comments
A U.S. District Court in New York dismissed a shareholder lawsuit that claimed Facebook executives including Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg didn’t disclose enough about risks to the company’s advertising business as consumers shifted to mobile devices. In a separate Facebook-related case against NASDAQ, the same judge denied a motion to move the case to a different court. It’s a win for Facebook as the company wades through a mess of litigation following its rocky IPO. “We are pleased with the court’s ruling,” the company said in a statement. The company’s shares have never recovered to the initial $ 38 price that the company sold stock at on its May 18 debut. The IPO, which raised about $ 16 billion for the company and early shareholders, was the most anticipated one since Google in 2004. Because Facebook’s shares have fallen more than 25 percent since the IPO, some investors have inevitably been disappointed. In this case, they said that Facebook executives sold billions of dollars of stock in the IPO even as internal projections suggested that the company’s revenues would fall short of earlier estimates. But the judge Robert W. Sweet said that the plaintiffs William Cole, Hal Hubuschman and Linda Levy bought their shares on the day of the IPO, well after Facebook had made several amendments to its IPO filing. Those amendments including warnings about the unproven ability of the company to make money on mobile platforms. The plaintiffs also cited several reports in the media that Facebook had lowered guidance to analysts, who then selectively disclosed that information to investors. In his ruling, Sweet said that even if Facebook disclosed internal projections that might have been material to the IPO, the plaintiffs hadn’t proven that it would have “significantly altered the total mix of information in the marketplace.” He also said that the timing of Zuckerberg’s decision to sell stock during the IPO wasn’t suspicious either because many executives routinely sell stock during public offerings. Lawyers for Facebook’s executives also argued that the case didn’t belong in that court or in California court, but instead in Delaware where Facebook is incorporated. In a separate class action lawsuit against NASDAQ for allegedly botching orders on the day of the IPO, Sweet denied a motion to remand, or move the case to another court. The plaintiff in that case, Michael Zack, wanted the case to be heard in New York’s
TechCrunch
Egyptian Court Wants To Block YouTube For a Month
Posted by Gsurface
on February 10, 2013
No comments
First time accepted submitter rogue-girl writes that a “Cairo Administrative Court announced earlier on Feb. 9 that a ruling has been issued to block YouTube within the country for 30 days. This decision comes after a lawsuit was filed back in September 2012 during the turmoil caused by the infamous trailer ‘The Innocence of Muslims’ spread through the popular video platform. The Court has also asked for all websites having published parts or the entire trailer to be banned for 30 days.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Appeals court considers software patents
Posted by Gsurface
on February 9, 2013
No comments
U.S. companies shouldn’t be able to get patents on abstract ideas when they combine those ideas with a computer process, a lawyer argued in an appeals court Friday.
Computerworld News
Egyptian court suspends YouTube for a month over controversial film (Update: Google statement)
Posted by Gsurface
on February 9, 2013
No comments
Users of YouTube in Egypt could face a month-long blackout of the service after an administrative court ruling ordered the website’s suspension. The ministries of communication and investment have been ordered to block the popular video sharing site, reports news agency MENA, for hosting the movie short Innocence of Muslims. The American-made film has caused strong reactions since its release in September, at which point the initial complaint about YouTube’s showing of it is said to have been made. Today’s decision is a result of that ruling, and while the service should still currently remain online, Egypt’s National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority has claimed it will uphold the suspension once it receives confirmation of the verdict. This isn’t the first time access to YouTube has been restricted by a government, and the very same film caused the Pakistani prime minister to call for a similar ban at the time of the movie’s release. We’ve reached out to Google for comment.
Update: Google has responded with the following statement:
“We have received nothing from the judge or government related to this matter.”
Source: Reuters
European Court Finds Copyright Doesn’t Automatically Trump Freedom Of Expression
Posted by Gsurface
on February 8, 2013
No comments
First time accepted submitter admiral snackbar writes “The European Court of Human Rights has declared that the copyright monopoly stands in direct conflict with fundamental Human Rights, as defined in the European Union and elsewhere. ‘For the first time in a judgment on the merits, the European Court of Human Rights has clarified that a conviction based on copyright law for illegally reproducing or publicly communicating copyright protected material can be regarded as an interference with the right of freedom of expression and information under Article 10 of the European Convention [on Human Rights]. Such interference must be in accordance with the three conditions enshrined in the second paragraph of Article 10 of the Convention. This means that a conviction or any other judicial decision based on copyright law, restricting a person’s or an organization’s freedom of expression, must be pertinently motivated as being necessary in a democratic society, apart from being prescribed by law and pursuing a legitimate aim.’”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
What Software Is Patentable? Federal Court To Consider In CLS Bank Rehearing
Posted by Gsurface
on February 8, 2013
No comments
Editor’s note: Anthony Lombardi practices litigation and patent prosecution at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
Software patents continue to command the spotlight. The Federal Circuit will hold an en banc rehearing of a prior decision, CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation. In that decision, a three-judge panel ruled that an invention related to a computerized trading platform constituted patent-eligible subject matter. This rehearing by the full Court is poised to impact software inventions and will further explore the issue of software patenting.
TechCrunch
UK Court: MPAA Not Entitled To Profits From Piracy
Posted by Gsurface
on February 7, 2013
No comments
jfruh writes “The MPAA and other entertainment industry groups have been locked for years in a legal struggle against Newzbin2, a Usenet-indexing site. Since Newzbin2 profited from making it easier for users to find pirated movies online, the MPAA contends they can sue to take those profits on behalf of members who produced that content in the first place. But a British court has rejected that argument.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Google cleared by Australia's High Court in deceptive AdWords case
Posted by Gsurface
on February 6, 2013
No comments
Australia's High Court cleared Google on Wednesday of violating fair trade law by allowing companies to purchase keywords containing their competitors' names, handing a defeat to the country's fair trade regulator.
Computerworld News
German Federal Court Rules That Internet Connection Is Crucial To Everyday Life
Posted by Gsurface
on January 25, 2013
No comments
Qedward writes “Internet access is as crucial to everyday life as having a phone connection and the loss of connectivity is deserving of financial compensation, the German Federal Court of Justice has ruled. Because having an internet connection is so significant for a large part of the German population, a customer whose service provider failed to provide connectivity between December 2008 and February 2009 is entitled to compensation, the court ruled today. ‘It is the first time the court ruled that an internet connection is as important a commodity as having a phone,’ said court spokeswoman Dietlind Weinland. The court, however, denied the plaintiff’s request of €50 a day for his fax machine not working.”
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Steve Jobs threatened Palm with patents over no-poaching deal, says court filing
Posted by Gsurface
on January 23, 2013
No comments
In a sworn statement made public today, former Palm CEO Edward Colligan says Jobs brandished patents when trying to get Palm to agree to a deal in which neither company would nick the other’s employees. [Read more]
CNET News
Recent Comments