Legal Radar

Jury Finds Robin Thicke and Pharrell Guilty of Copying “Blurred Lines” Song

Just recently, a jury gave Marvin Gaye’s children close to $7.4 million early this week after it was concluded that Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams copied their father’s song to compose “Blurred Lines.” The song was one of the hottest singles back in 2013.

Thicke and Williams have earned over $7 million each for the song.

Gaye’s children sued both singers for copyright infringement in 2013.

Williams said that Gaye’s music describes a song about his youth. But the Grammy winner testified saying he didn’t utilize any of it for “Blurred Lines.”

Both Thicke and Williams were accused of lying on the song creation process. Gaye’s children is said to be rewarded with millions of dollars if they found the song “Got to Give It Up” --- one of their father’s tracks --- to be infringed.

Williams also signed a document, which stated of not using work from other music artists and will be liable for damages if a copyright claim was successful.

SC Siding with Teva on Patent Issue

The U.S. Supreme Court early this week overturned a Court of Appeals ruling that invalidated a patent by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. on a multi-sclerosis drug (Copaxone), offering the drug manufacturer a chance to stall generic competitors.

The court ruling gives new life to Teva’s ability to prevent competitors from making headway into the Copaxone market until the patent expiration this September.

It also serves as another rebuke by the SC to the Federal Circuit, a special court that listens to a bulk of the country’s patent appeals.

In the past few years, as patents are playing a bigger role in the country’s economy, the Supreme Court has dealt with numerous patent appeals and overturned many rulings from the Federal Court.

In a 7-2 decision made by the court, Justice Stephen Brever said the Federal Circuit needs to be deferential in studying determinations done by trial judges who look into patent infringement cases.

Google Looking to SC on Copyright Case

After the Supreme Court spent months chipping away at patent protection for software, Google Inc., and other tech firms now want limits to be set on how program makers can utilize copyrights to add exclusive rights over software.

Google’s request offers the court a chance to think of the extent on which innovation of software can be replicated without the knowledge of the original developer.

Oracle purchased Java when it bought out Sun Microsystems in 2010 and filed a suit against Google on the very same year, claiming that the search giant’s Android software for handheld devices infringed copyrights on the Java platform.

The legal war divided the both firms. Google and Oracle claim that their position would lead to a major blow of tech innovation. A judge prevented Oracle from pursuing specific copyright claims against the search giant, but the court of appeals in the previous year overturned such ruling and ended up siding with Oracle.

Google’s request of limiting copyrights would alter a legal shield that are essential to software industry growth.

Win for Google and Allies Stomps Causes Vringo Shares to Plummet

Live and die by the patent. That’s typically the fate of today’s intellectual property firms, with Vringo feeling the sting.

The NY-based firm has 500-plus patents and applications that covers internet search, handheld technologies, and telecom structure. Vringo profits by licensing patents to other firms or bringing them to court if they can’t get along.

Vringo filed a suit against Google and other companies, claiming they’ve infringed on patents coverings methods of filtering search results of the internet to making them relevant. While a jury agreed, the U.S. of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the decision.

Shares of Vringo plummeted to 88 cents last week, bringing the firm’s market value under $100 million.

Attorneys from Google argued in I/P Engine’s invention case was obvious since it mixed information-filter methods that were already popular. The court of appeals agreed.

The win may be small but it’s a welcome boost for Google and other firms looking to restrict powers of patent-enforcing companies by making patent reform laws.

VirnetX Wins Patent Suit Round against Apple

Just recently, a federal judge shot down Apple’s motion for a judgment summary on its current patent litigation with VirnetX, a patent holding firm.

VirnetX’s shares is up over 4% early this week.

The Eastern District of Texas District Court denied allegations from Apple that terms were utilized by VirnetX in uncertain patents were too vague and deemed unenforceable for indecisiveness.

Both sides offered documents on the disputed terms as well as other motions at a Markman hearing early on May 20^th, where a judge instead of the jury will be ruling on patent terms. VirnetX allege Apple is in violation of 16 of its secure network patents.

The court order Markman precludes Apple from declaring invalidation as a primary defense against patent infringement claims that were tried by the jury on VirnetX’s prior suit against Apple.

Apple isn’t precluded from assuming invalidity as a patent infringement defense on allegations that weren’t tried before the jury in the Apple case.

$283M Award Reversed by U.S. Judge in the Loral Patent Case

Loral Space & Communications Inc. can breathe a sigh of relief today as a U.S. Judge reversed a $283 MIllion award against the company. ViSat Inc. has also requested a court order which would bar further action regarding patent infringement. ViaSat which is a satellite network systems firm, sued Loral in 2012 for breach of contract and patent infringement. In April, ViaSat won their case and the jury award. But early in August, U.S. District Judge Marilyn Huff struck down the award and set a new date for the damages trial to be held in November. Huff stated that awards for damages are not "exact science."  ViaSat's request for an injunction which would bar the use of technology which is the primary issue is still pending. 

The initial case stems from a dispute between the two companies who were working to collaborate on a construction project according to the court papers. When the case continues this fall, the award could be increased or decreased. 

Apple and Samsung Agree to Truce Outside the U.S.

Apple and Samsung agreed to shoot down all their patent battles between them in courts outside the United States. This marks an ease of tension between the two handheld giants. The recent agreement greatly affects current disputes in several other countries.

Apple and Samsung are the biggest smartphone manufacturers in the globe. While they take up under half of international shipments, they accumulate a majority of the mobile tech profits.

Apple initially filed a suit against Samsung in the U.S. for replicating aspects of the iPhone three years ago. Samsung, in return, filed a suit against Apple for patent infringement in several countries including France, Italy, the U.K., South Korea, Japan, the Netherlands, Germany, and Australia. Apple also sued Samsung in five of those nations.

Apple and Samsung will finally dismiss all claims, except for those in the U.S.

In the previous week, Apple dismissed its appeal on a judgment from the first patent case that denied Samsung a permanent injunction against several Samsung items.

Both have called a truce in the worldwide tech war.

Google “Glass” Trademark Freed from Hurdle

Google’s struggle in registering the word “Glass” as a trademark for its pc-powered tech glasses seems to have cleared a huge hurdle.

Google filed an application in the previous year on a trademark for its “Glass” word, which covers PC hardware and components displayed in the same font showcased in its marketing promotion. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office maintained the American giant’s bid.

Google finally agreed to a settlement with two firms that objected its planned trademark. These firms involve Factory Holding Company 25, S.L., a Spanish-based firm that offers a software platform for handhelds; and Border Stylo, LLC, a developing company for a “Write on Glass” browser extension.

Both firms went against Google’s filings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, alleging their “Glass” trademarks were strikingly alike to Google app.

The settlement aids Google in addressing a key aspect brought about a federal trademark examiner operating on its app.

The American search engine firm managed to successfully register a trademark for the “Google Glass” term.

SoundCloud Severing License Ties to Curb Litigation

SoundCloud is presently in a conversation with major record labels to curb any copyright infringement violations that could lead its user from uploading audio content without authorization of music artists.

As part of the deal, SoundCloud is open to hand up to 5% of ownership rights to several major labels which include Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, and Universal Music Group. The negotiations will allow record labels to earn future profits. In return, SoundCloud will gain licenses to play audio content from record the labels it negotiated with.

The negative aspect for SoundCloud is that such deal gives room from copyright collecting mediums, publishing companies, and indie labels such as that of AZIM and Merlin, who now has the power to request the same deal.

The negotiation puts SoundCloud’s value from $500 to $600 billion. This is a little under the $700 billion estimation placed on the firm at the time of an alleged takeover by Twitter Inc.

SoundCloud currently has an active subscription base of 50-plus million subscribers and 200 million users monthly.

Court Ruling in Favor of LPKP in Patent Infringement Case

LPKF, a specialized mechanical engineering firm, and AG, an electronics company, announced that the Mannheim Regional Court favored LPKF in the latest ruling against Motorola in a legal battle regarding patent infringement.

LPKF gained a preliminary victory in a legal battle concerning patent infringement for LDS (Laser Direct Structuring).

On July 8^th of this year, the Manheim Regional Court demanded Motorola Mobility and Motorola Deutschland to stop selling mobile phones in Germany that infringe the patent and asked Motorola Deutschland to recall all its patent infringed mobile phones from commercial buyers.

Furthermore, the court determined that bother parties should pay for compensation. An appeal may be made on the judgment.

The LDS methods patented by LPKF is increasingly utilized to make antennas for mobile phones or tablet PCs.

Last year, the patent was deemed invalid in China. LPKP consequently handed an application to re-open proceedings, which China’s Supreme Court took in for review. In addition, LPKF is taking action against mobile phone manufacturers carrying forged LDS materials and circulating them outside China.