Blog

  • Children Has The Right To Music

    posted by Keito
    2012-09-04 21:14:44
    'Bruce Willis 'considering iTunes legal action' against Apple...

    Bruce Willis, the Hollywood actor, is said to be considering legal action against Apple so he can leave his iTunes music collection to his three daughters.

    The 57-year-old action star has reportedly spent thousands of dollars on digital music, which he wants to leave to daughters Rumer, 24, Scout, 20, and Tallaluh, 18.

    Existing iTunes rules mean he cannot do so however, as purchased music is only “borrowed” under a license.

    If Willis is able to successfully challenge the small print, it could benefit millions of frustrated iTunes users who haven’t had the resources to fight the technology giant.

    He is said to be considering two approaches to the digital battle. His first option would be asking his lawyers to establish a family trust to hold the downloads.

    A second approach would be supporting ongoing legal tussles in other US states, where complainants are already seeking to gain more rights to their music.

    With more and more people buying digital media products, the issue of ownership is becoming an increasing problem with many not realising they do not hold the rights to their books, music, films or games.

    Solicitor Chris Walton told The Daily Mail: “Lots of people will be surprised on learning all those tracks and books they have bought over the years don’t actually belong to them. It’s only natural you would want to pass them on to a loved one.

    “The law will catch up, but ideally Apple and the like will update their policies and work out the best solution for their customers.”'

    http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/09/03/153220/bruce-willis-considering-legal-action-against-apple-over-itunes-collection

    UPDATE: According to a tweet made by Bruce's wife this story isn't actually true... shame!
  • Monopoly controls...

    posted by Keito
    2012-09-04 20:11:22
  • Tokyo court gives win to Samsung after US loss

    posted by Keito
    2012-09-02 16:26:58
    'A court in Tokyo has ruled that Samsung Electronics did not infringe on patents held by Apple, a victory for the South Korean company.

    The patent was related to transferring media content between devices.

    It comes after Samsung lost a key patent case in the US last week and was ordered to pay more than $1bn (£664m) in damages.

    This is one of many cases brought to courts around the world by the two smartphone market leaders.

    "We welcome the court's decision, which confirmed our long-held position that our products do not infringe Apple's intellectual property," said Samsung in a statement to the BBC.

    Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji dismissed the case filed by Apple in August, finding that Samsung was not in violation of Apple patents related to synchronising music and video data between devices and servers.
    Sales ban

    On 24 August, a US court ruled Samsung had infringed Apple patents for mobile devices, including the iPhone and iPad.

    The company has vowed to continue to fight against Apple saying it will appeal against the US ruling.

    Apple is now seeking a ban on sales of eight Samsung phones in the US market.

    On 6 December, US District Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the initial trial, will hear Apple's plea for an injunction against the Samsung phones, although it does not include the most recent Samsung phone to hit the market, the Galaxy S3.'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19433019
  • Why I ♥ Linux

    posted by Keito
    2012-08-30 19:05:57
  • Apple awarded $1bn in damages from Samsung in US court

    posted by Keito
    2012-08-25 09:10:55
    Sad to see the result of this case in the US. A travesty.

    Software patents suck, and this is going to do nothing but stifle innovation.

    Apple... 'ultimate patent troll'.

    The patent game itself has become a dressed up method of extortion, and the patents granted by out-of-touch or unaware/uniformed judges can be ludicrous. It really does all come down to the judge who grants them or precedes over the patent argument at the time, and how far the companies are willing to go in order to secure those patents or a win.

    Quite simply, software patents need to be abolished.

    *****

    'A US court has ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05bn (£665m) in damages for infringing intellectual property.

    The jury decided several Samsung devices had infringed iPhone-maker Apple's software and design patents, but rejected counter-claims by Samsung.

    Apple will now seek import bans on several of its rival's products. Samsung has said it will appeal.

    Correspondents say the ruling is one of the most significant in a global battle over patents and intellectual property.

    In recent weeks, a court in South Korea ruled that both technology firms had copied each other, while a British court threw out claims by the US company that Samsung had infringed its copyright.

    But the year-long US case has involved some of the biggest damages claims, and is likely to shape the way patent licences are handled in the future.

    'Monopoly' gibe

    Samsung promised to appeal against the decision describing it as "a loss for the American consumer".

    "It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices," the South Korean firm said.

    The statement added that it was "unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners".

    Apple, however, said it applauded the court "for finding Samsung's behaviour wilful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn't right".

    Apple said it intended to seek sales injunctions at a follow-up hearing on 20 September

    The two firms account for more than half of global smartphone and tablet computer sales.

    The nine-person jury at the federal court in San Jose, California had to consider 700 questions about each side's claim that its rival had infringed its intellectual property.

    It deliberated for less than three days before coming to a unanimous decision, rejecting all of Samsung's claims and upholding five of Apple's allegations, including:

    # Some of Samsung's handsets, including its Galaxy S 4G model, infringed Apple's design patents for the look of its iPhone including the system it uses to display text and icons

    # All the disputed Samsung devices had copied Apple's "bounce-back response", which makes lists jump back as if yanked by a rubber band

    # Several Samsung devices incorporated Apple's facility allowing users to zoom into text with a tap of a finger

    Apple had wanted $2.5bn in damages. Samsung had sought $519m.

    'Social cost'

    Michael Gartenburg, research director at Gartner, told the BBC it could be a good thing for consumers in the long run because it would force Apple's competitors to innovate.

    "Anyone who was even thinking about borrowing a technology or design from Apple will think twice about it now," he said.

    Other analysts point out that Apple could be the overall loser because the court case has helped boost Samsung's profile.

    Also, the South Korean firm has already brought out a new generation of products that should avoid the patent issues.

    However, Christopher Marlett of investment bank MDB Capital Group said there was a "social cost" for Samsung.

    "As a company, you don't want to be known as someone who steals from someone else," he said.

    Apple remains one of the South Korean company's biggest customers buying computer chips and, reportedly, screens.'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19377261