Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Florian Mueller’

Google, Oracle Deny Direct Payments To Media

August 17th, 2012 08:32 admin View Comments

The Media

itwbennett writes “Earlier this month, the judge in the Oracle v. Google trial ordered the companies to disclose the names of bloggers and reporters who had taken payments from them. Not surprisingly, both companies have denied making direct payments to writers (with the exception of Florian Mueller of FOSSPatents, whose relationship to Oracle was disclosed in April). But Oracle has tattled on Google regarding some indirect connections. In particular, Oracle called out Ed Black for an article he wrote about the case for Forbes. And Jonathan Band, co-author of the book, ‘Interfaces on Trial 2.0,’ which Google cited in its April 3, 2012 copyright brief.” Groklaw has an in-depth look at the filings. Oracle’s fingerpointing is based in part on this BBC article and this piece at The Recorder, both of which they entered into evidence. Google’s filing (PDF) affirmed that they have not paid media for articles or done any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage. However, they acknowledged that many people receive money from Google through other means (the company’s philanthropy, ad business, etc.), and asked the judge if he wanted further details about those instances.

Source: Google, Oracle Deny Direct Payments To Media

Paid Media Must Be Disclosed In Oracle v. Google

August 7th, 2012 08:44 admin View Comments

Android

jfruh writes “One of the odder moments during the Oracle v. Google trial over Java patents came when patent blogger Florian Mueller disclosed that he had a ‘consulting relationship‘ with Oracle. Now it looks like we’re going to find out which other tech bloggers and journalists were on the payroll of one of the two sides in this epic fight. Judge William Alsup has ordered (PDF) that both parties disclose ‘all authors, journalists, commentators or bloggers who have reported or commented on any issues in this case and who have received money (other than normal subscription fees) from the party or its counsel during the pendency of this action.’”

Source: Paid Media Must Be Disclosed In Oracle v. Google

Florian Mueller Outs Himself As Oracle Employee

April 19th, 2012 04:11 admin View Comments

Businesses

eldavojohn writes “So you’re commenting on your highly visible blog about patent case after patent case that deal with corporations battling over open source stuff, what does it matter if you’re taking money from one and not the other? If you don’t see any ethical problems with that, you might be Florian Mueller. Groklaw’s PJ (who has been suspicious of Florian’s ties to other giants like Microsoft for quite sometime) has noticed that Florian Mueller has decided to go full disclosure and admit that all his commentary on the Oracle v Google case might be tainted by his employment by Oracle. It seems he’s got a bunch of consulting money coming his way from Oracle but I’m sure that won’t undermine any of his assessments like Android licenses violate the GPL or that Oracle will win $6 billion from Google and Google was “at risk” of not settling despite the outcome that the charges later dropped to a small fraction of the $6 billion. Like so many other times, PJ’s hunch was right.”

Source: Florian Mueller Outs Himself As Oracle Employee

ITC Throws Out B&N Antitrust Claims Against MS

February 1st, 2012 02:00 admin View Comments

Android

N!NJA writes with an excerpt from a post by Florian Mueller: “Barnes & Noble’s primary line of defense against Microsoft’s allegations of patent infringement by the bookseller’s Android-based devices has collapsed in its entirety. An Administrative Law Judge at the ITC today granted a Microsoft motion to dismiss, even ahead of the evidentiary trial that will start next Monday (February 6), Barnes & Noble’s ‘patent misuse’ defense against Microsoft. [...] Prior to the ALJ, the ITC staff — or more precisely, the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (OUII), which participates in many investigations as a third party representing the public interest — already supported Microsoft’s motion all the way. The OUII basically concluded that even if all of what Barnes & Noble said about Microsoft’s use of patents against Android was accurate, it would fall far short of the legal requirements for a patent misuse defense.”

Source: ITC Throws Out B&N Antitrust Claims Against MS

Apple Vs Samsung: Australian Court Bans Samsung From Selling Galaxy Tab 10.1

October 13th, 2011 10:58 admin View Comments

Samsung Logo

After obtaining preliminary injunctions in a number of countries, Apple’s lawyers have managed to block the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia. The injunction although not permanent, stays valid until a full hearing which is scheduled to happen sometime next year.

The case which started with Apple claiming infringement of up to 13 patents, at the end came down to two patents, one of which credited Steve Jobs as its inventor. Sydney Morning Herald reports:

Justice Annabelle Bennett today said Apple had a prima facie case that Samsung had infringed two of its patents relating to touch screens and the gestures that control them.

Samsung had agreed to not start selling or even marketing the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia until a decision was arrived at, and at one point of time even contemplated scrapping the release of the product due to the excessive delays.

Samsung, in its response to the decision voiced its disappointment saying:

“Samsung will be seeking legal advice on its options. Samsung will continue its legal proceeding against Apple’s claim in order to ensure our innovative products remain available to consumers. We will continue to legally assert our intellectual property rights against those who violate Samsung’s patents and free ride on our technology.”

The last sentence refers to a number of patents owned by Samsung related to wireless networks, which the iPhone 4S allegedly infringes. Samsung has been quite vocal about its decision to counter-sue Apple, eyeing at a ban on the iPhone 4S in various countries including Australia.

Although we aren’t intellectual property experts, at first look Apple’s claim of Samsung “slavishly” copying iOS devices does seem true to a certain extent, as can be seen in this post.

Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents, goes onto speculate:

The two patents on which today’s ruling is based aren’t Galaxy Tab 10.1-specific at all. They will affect all Android-based smartphones and tablet computers, across all vendors.

If Apple wins the Australian case at the end of the main proceeding, all Android-based products will effectively be shut out of the Australian market forever, unless Google or its device maker partners settle with Apple.

For now, this decision essentially means that Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 won’t ever make its début in Australia. Even if the outcome of the final hearing (which won’t start before next year) goes in Samsung’s favor, the market by then would have evolved a lot making the Galaxy Tab 10.1 outdated.

[via SMH, iTnews]

Source: Apple Vs Samsung: Australian Court Bans Samsung From Selling Galaxy Tab 10.1

Samsung Seeks To Ban iPhone 4S In France And Italy

October 6th, 2011 10:46 admin View Comments

Samsung logo

As anonymous Samsung officials had suggested, Samsung has announced on its website that plans to get the iPhone 4S banned in France and Italy, for which it would file motions in courts of both countries. The motions filed are based on alleged infringement of two of Samsung’s patents related to Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) standards for 3G mobile handsets.

A blog post on Samsung’s Official Global Blog read:

Samsung’s preliminary injunction requests in France and Italy will each cite two patent infringements related to wireless telecommunications technology, specifically Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) standards for 3G mobile handsets. 

The infringed technology is essential to the reliable functioning of telecom networks and devices and Samsung believes that Apple’s violation as being too severe and that the iPhone 4S should be barred from sales.

Apple has continued to flagrantly violate our intellectual property rights and free ride on our technology. We believe it is now necessary to take legal action to protect our innovation.

Samsung plans to file preliminary injunctions in other countries after further review.

The last line, revealing the company’s intentions to sue Apple in other countries, might mean that their lawsuits in these two countries were rushed so as to capitalize on the iPhone 4S launch and also to get it banned as soon as possible. The reason these two markets were chosen according to a Samsung spokes person speaking to WSJ were:

because they are “key markets” in Europe, citing also “the local legal system and processes.”

The patents in discussion are subject to FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms of licensing, and as Florian Mueller puts it, the question of a ban arises only if Apple refuses to pay the royalties associated with this patent:

This is what the FRAND issue comes down to: if those patents are essential, then there are two questions to be analyzed by a court: Does Apple have to pay? And if so, how much can Samsung ask for under a FRAND framework? But an injunction can only be justified if and when Apple refuses to pay a FRAND royalty that it owes in the binding opinion of a court of competent jurisdiction.

For what its worth, the iPhone 4S would be available for sale in France and Italy not on October 14th but the last week of October, giving Apple’s lawyers enough time to prepare a response.

Samsung’s anonymous officials who spoke to The Korea Times in September, got their claim of “NFC being included on the iPhone” totally wrong. It might still be in the pipeline, but obviously hasn’t found a place on the iPhone 4S.

So do you think Samsung is being too optimistic about getting the iPhone 4S banned?

[via Samsung Tomorrow]

Source: Samsung Seeks To Ban iPhone 4S In France And Italy

Samsung Seeks To Ban iPhone 4S In France And Italy

October 6th, 2011 10:46 admin View Comments

Samsung logo

As anonymous Samsung officials had suggested, Samsung has announced on its website that plans to get the iPhone 4S banned in France and Italy, for which it would file motions in courts of both countries. The motions filed are based on alleged infringement of two of Samsung’s patents related to Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) standards for 3G mobile handsets.

A blog post on Samsung’s Official Global Blog read:

Samsung’s preliminary injunction requests in France and Italy will each cite two patent infringements related to wireless telecommunications technology, specifically Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) standards for 3G mobile handsets. 

The infringed technology is essential to the reliable functioning of telecom networks and devices and Samsung believes that Apple’s violation as being too severe and that the iPhone 4S should be barred from sales.

Apple has continued to flagrantly violate our intellectual property rights and free ride on our technology. We believe it is now necessary to take legal action to protect our innovation.

Samsung plans to file preliminary injunctions in other countries after further review.

The last line, revealing the company’s intentions to sue Apple in other countries, might mean that their lawsuits in these two countries were rushed so as to capitalize on the iPhone 4S launch and also to get it banned as soon as possible. The reason these two markets were chosen according to a Samsung spokes person speaking to WSJ were:

because they are “key markets” in Europe, citing also “the local legal system and processes.”

The patents in discussion are subject to FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms of licensing, and as Florian Mueller puts it, the question of a ban arises only if Apple refuses to pay the royalties associated with this patent:

This is what the FRAND issue comes down to: if those patents are essential, then there are two questions to be analyzed by a court: Does Apple have to pay? And if so, how much can Samsung ask for under a FRAND framework? But an injunction can only be justified if and when Apple refuses to pay a FRAND royalty that it owes in the binding opinion of a court of competent jurisdiction.

For what its worth, the iPhone 4S would be available for sale in France and Italy not on October 14th but the last week of October, giving Apple’s lawyers enough time to prepare a response.

Samsung’s anonymous officials who spoke to The Korea Times in September, got their claim of “NFC being included on the iPhone” totally wrong. It might still be in the pipeline, but obviously hasn’t found a place on the iPhone 4S.

So do you think Samsung is being too optimistic about getting the iPhone 4S banned?

[via Samsung Tomorrow]

Source: Samsung Seeks To Ban iPhone 4S In France And Italy

Court Ruling Compels Samsung To Withdraw Galaxy Tab 7.7 From German Trade Fair

September 4th, 2011 09:45 admin View Comments

Samsung Vs Apple

Samsung has received another setback in its legal fight with Apple, when a German court banned the sales of the Galaxy Tab 7.7  in Germany on the 2nd of this month. This news didn’t come out of the court rooms until Samsung announced on September 4th, that it was forced to withdraw the Tab 7.7 from Germany’s annual trade fair IFA to respect the court’s orders.

This news comes after Samsung’s Galaxy line of smartphones and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 were given more or less the same treatment in most parts of Europe.

The Galaxy Tab 7.7 and Galaxy Note 5.3 were Samsung’s major product launches at IFA, and managed to grab quite a few eyeballs throughout the tech sphere. Samsung’s efforts to remove all traces of promotional material relating to the one of its grand attractions at IFA – the Galaxy Tab 7.7 has been pictured throughout the web, some of which you can find embedded below:

Samsung Hiding Galaxy Tab 7.7 Hoardings At IFA

Samsung Hiding Galaxy Tab 7.7 Hoardings At IFA

Samsung Hiding Galaxy Tab 7.7 Hoardings At IFA

The first few responses after the removal of the Galaxy Tab 7.7 from their booth from Samsung’s side didn’t admit any new court ruling, the spokesperson chose to not even mention the Galaxy Tab by name. Here is an excerpt from an interview of the spokesperson with AndroidPit, translated into English by Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents:

AndroidPit: People saw that you removed all Galaxy Tabs 7.7 and covered [parts of the tables] with a sheet. What’s the matter with this?

Samsung: We have decided — on a current occasion — to replace the product with our other IFA highlight product, the Galaxy Note, since, as the press reported, we weren’t going to offer the product for sale in Germany anyway, so we want to show our customers the other product — the [Galaxy] Note — more closely.

AndroidPit: Does this have to do with Apple by any chance?

Samsung: On this one I have to ask you for your understanding that I’m not allowed to comment on an ongoing [legal] proceeding.

AndroidPit: So this apparently means you want to focus more on the Galaxy Note and you have therefore taken a decision on short notice to rearrange your exhibits?

Samsung: The Note was going to be our highlight product anyway and since the other product wasn’t going to be sold in Germany at any rate, I believe it’s also better for the consumers here [at the show] and simpler and in the interest of trade show visitors that we really show only those products that are really going to be released in Germany.

Later a Samsung Korea spokesperson, in a statement to Bloomberg, admitted that the move was indeed a consequence of the court order. This embarrassing move is definitely a big loss for Samsung, considering that IFA is the European equivalent of the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in the United States.

For all those keeping tabs, Apple has scored an initial victory over Samsung in most of Europe and Australia forcing it to stop the sales of many of its products, at least temporarily, in these regions. And for what its worth, Samsung won’t be selling the Galaxy Tab 7.7 in the United States either. 

These legal battles are far from over, in fact the next spot where Samsung could possibly face a ban on its products is the US, where Samsung is citing Stanley Kubrick’s ’2001: A Space Odyssey’ movie as prior art against iPad design patent. A hearing over this issue is scheduled for October 13th in a court in California, where Apple has already filed for a preliminary injunction.

[via FOSS Patents, Bloomberg]

Source: Court Ruling Compels Samsung To Withdraw Galaxy Tab 7.7 From German Trade Fair

Apple Claims Samsung and Motorola Patent Monopoly

September 1st, 2011 09:42 admin View Comments

Google

esocid writes with a bit in Daily Tech about the ongoing spat between Apple and the rest of the mobile world. From the article: “Apple lawyers are crying foul about Samsung, and … Motorola’s allegedly ‘anticompetitive,’ use of patents. … Apparently Apple is irate about these companies’ countersuits, which rely largely on patents covering wireless communications, many of which are governed by the ‘fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory’ (F/RAND) principle, as they were developed as part of industry standards. … Apple takes issue with the fact that Motorola in its countersuit declines to differentiate the 7 F/RAND patents in its 18 patent collection. … Regardless of what Florian Mueller says, it’s hard to dispute that the ‘rules’ of F/RAND are largely community dictated and ambiguous.”

Source: Apple Claims Samsung and Motorola Patent Monopoly

FSF Uses Android FUD To Push GPLv3

August 22nd, 2011 08:29 admin View Comments

Android

jfruhlinger writes “We’ve already seen claims from Edward Naughton and Florian Mueller that most Android distributors are in violation of the GPL — claims that the open source community has, for the most part, rejected. Therefore it’s disheartening to see that the FSF is using this line of reasoning to push the GPL v3 over the supposedly more troublesome GPL v2. The FSF’s press release on the subject emphasizes ‘worries’ without bringing up a specific concrete case of infringement — a classic FUD technique.”

Source: FSF Uses Android FUD To Push GPLv3

YOYOYOOYOYOYO