The EC’s concerns are more general, having been satisfied that it was not in Google’s best interest to limit Android to solely Motorola. “Upon careful examination, this transaction does not itself raise competition issues” competition commissioner Joaquin Almunia said in a statement. ”Of course, the Commission will continue to keep a close eye on the behavior of all market players in the sector, particularly the increasingly strategic use of patents.”

“In light of the importance of this industry to consumers and the complex issues raised by the intersection of the intellectual property rights and antitrust law at issue here, as well as uncertainty as to the exercise of the acquired rights, the division continues to monitor the use of SEPs in the wireless device industry, particularly in the smartphone and computer tablet markets. The division will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action to stop any anticompetitive use of SEP rights” Department of Justice Antitrust Division

Last month, the EC announced that it was investigating Samsung over claims of antitrust behavior around its use of 3G/UMTS patents and licensing thereof. The Korean company had attempted to use those wireless patents in litigation against Apple, with Apple firing back that its rival was demanding unfair terms for the use of the technology.

As for consumers, meanwhile, there remain questions around how the deal will impact Google’s Nexus program and software on future Motorola devices. For Android OEMs, despite Google’s Andy Rubin saying the Nexus partnerships are still up for grabs for any company, not just Motorola, it’s unclear how much internal support the Android software team will give its newly-acquired hardware division.

The approval was given after an Antitrust Division investigation by the department, each acquisition being found unlikely to substantially lessen competition in the markets these businesses operate in. One point of order though was the continued watching of how the groups handle their newly purchased SEPs – that is, standard essential patents. These patents are the ones that would allow any group owning them to seek legal battles against those who they found infringing on said patents.

“In light of the importance of this industry to consumers and the complex issues raised by the intersection of the intellectual property rights and antitrust law at issue here, as well as uncertainty as to the exercise of the acquired rights, the division continues to monitor the use of SEPs in the wireless device industry, particularly in the smartphone and computer tablet markets. The division will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action to stop any anticompetitive use of SEP rights.” – USDoJ

You hear that, companies? No taking these patents and putting your competitors out of business – that’s not just mean, it’s anticompetitive in this case – and it’s illegal. Each of these groups agreed to a noncompete of sorts once the deals took place, each of them also outlined in brief by the USDoJ. Have a look at what these groups agreed to:

“The division’s concerns about the potential anticompetitive use of SEPs was lessened by the clear commitments by Apple and Microsoft to license SEPs on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, as well as their commitments not to seek injunctions in disputes involving SEPs. Google’s commitments were more ambiguous and do not provide the same direct confirmation of its SEP licensing policies.” – USDoJ

So we’ll see how this pans out in the months to come – Google still needs a few approvals around the world before the purchase can be completed. One at a time!

[via Justice.gov]

This merger comes without concern from the EU on whether it will present any competition issues, but the idea that Motorola was purchased for its patents is alive in the minds of more than just Google. EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia spoke on the matter in a set of statements. Almunia said he was worried that Google and other firms involved may raise a series of legal disputes over intellectual property rights. Almunia spoke thusly:

“We have approved the acquisition… because upon careful examination, this transaction does not itself raise competition issues. This merger decision should not and will not mean that we are not concerned by the possibility that, once Google is the owner of this portfolio, Google can abuse these patents, linking some patents with its Android devices. This is our worry. We might be obliged to open some cases in the future. This is not enough to block the merger but we will be vigilant.” – Almunia

In addition to U.S. Justice Department approval, the companies also need approval from Chinese regulators. March 20th should be the date when all of this is finalized, if sources speaking with Reuters are to be believed. Google will use Motorola’s 17,000 patents and 7,500 pending patent applications to defend themselves against the incoming wave of litigation cases coming from rivals like Microsoft and Apple. The war rages on!

[via Reuters]

“Following Google’s acquisition of MMI [Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc.], Google will honor MMI’s existing commitments to license the acquired MMI Essential Patent Claims on RAND [reasonable terms and conditions demonstrable free of any unfair discrimination] terms, as required by IEEE rules and consistent with MMI’s longstanding practice. This letter is irrevocable. Google understand that, pursuant to IEEE rules, MMI is prepared to grant licenses for Essential Patent Claims with a maximum per-unit royalty of 2.25-percent of the net selling price for the relevant end product on a go-forward basis, subject to offsets for the value of any cross-licenses or other consideration received from the licensee” Allen Lo, Deputy General Counsel, Google

Apple has argued that Motorola’s fee demands are excessive, and that its rivals are not following FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) guidelines in a similar way to that which sparked an EC investigation into potential antitrust behavior by Samsung. The Cupertino company’s legal team has also sought disclosure from other smartphone manufacturers as to how much they’ve agreed to pay Motorola in licensing fees, though it’s possible Motorola could argue that the reciprocal licensing means the deals are non-comparable.

Meanwhile, Google’s stance on potential injunctions is apparently unchanged from Motorola Mobility’s existing approach: that is, to apply for an injunction if licensees don’t agree to its royalty terms. If, it’s suggested, the 2.25-percent referred solely to the specific component the patented technology was applied in – for instance, a baseband 3G/UMTS radio chipset – then that might be reasonable, but Motorola is chasing 2.25-percent of the entire end-product, i.e. almost $15 on the unsubsidized price of each entry-level iPhone 4S.

The decision as to whether Google is allowed to acquire Motorola Mobility is expected to be reached on February 13.

[via Fortune]

Line art shows a tablet style controller that has some kind connectivity with a sensor on top of the TV. The set-top sensor connects to the console, which looks very much like the current Nintendo Wii in the artwork. Making things even odder, one of the pictures with the patent shows what appears to be the gamer turned into a robot with a laser gun in the tablet controller screen. The smart thing would be to use the PS Vita rather than some other controller, which is what this patent appears to be showing.

Engadget reports that patent text outlines a “position-dependent gaming, 3-D controller, and handheld as a remote,” that acts like an “input for video game.”" I really don’t want to make this; it is very odd. I am not surprised Sony is trying to go this route; it doesn’t want to be left out on a new and hot feature that Nintendo will be using. What do you think? This could be part of that Sony four screen strategy.

[via Engadget]

It’s assumed it refers to Apple’s sales and covers all Motorola Mobility patented technologies the Cupertino company uses. Even so, the figure appears excessive.

Apple has argued that it is covered by a cross-licensing agreement between Motorola and Qualcomm around 3G standards, since it uses Qualcomm radio chipsets in its more recent products. However, Motorola has made several attempts to block Apple’s request to bring that licensing agreement in front of the German courts, only eventually succeeding to have it discussed in a closed hearing.

One tidbit that was revealed in a late January 2012 Apple brief opposing a Motorola attempt to keep the agreement out of the courtroom is the FRAND licensing offer Motorola made. The figure is mentioned in a letter sent by the Bardehle Pagenberg firm representing Apple, to Dr. Marcus Grosch of Quinn Emanuel, Motorola’s German lead counsel.

Apple has argued that Motorola’s demands for licensing fees are excessive, and that the company has not adhered to FRAND rules that insist upon a reasonable rate.

To try to prove that, Apple is seeking information on how much other smartphone companies pay Motorola for the same patents, filing discovery motions in late January for details from Nokia, HTC, LG Electronics and Ericsson (though the latter was subsequently voluntarily dismissed). Motorola’s defense, it’s suggested, is likely to be that its deals with other manufacturers also include licensing agreements that work in the opposite direction, and that the royalty figures could be lower because of that.

Nonetheless, if Apple can prove Motorola has been unfair in its request then it could not only escape the injunction issued by the German courts last December, but land Motorola in hot water with the European Commission. The EC is already investigating Samsung over potential antitrust behavior in licensing FRAND patents, in part because of the Korean company’s suit against Apple.

Motorola had succeeded in having most of Apple’s 3G-enabled range blocked from sale in Germany after a ruling last December, with the injunction going into effect earlier today. However, Apple managed to have the injunction suspended amid claims that Motorola refused to license the 3G/UMTS patent in question under FRAND terms.

Those terms – “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” – mean that Motorola must agree to license the patent, deemed necessary to 3G/UMTS standards, to anyone who requests it. Motorola runs the risk of encouraging unwanted attention from the European Commission if the company is believed to be not playing by FRAND rules; Samsung is under antitrust investigation over similar behaviors.

The injunction enacted today comes at the same time as Motorola was granted a second injunction, this time over iCloud rather than FRAND patents. It’s unclear if Motorola will stump up the €100m bond required to actually follow through on that injunction, however.

The research is tipped via a patent filing called “Interfacing Portable Media Devices And Sports Equipment.” The patent surfaced this week in the trademark and patent office database, but was filed on October 12, 2011. Interestingly, one of the names on the filing is Apple engineer Donald Ginsberg. Ginsberg heads up that Apple Made for iPod program.

The patent outlines a way the workout data from your Apple device can be shared in real-time with your friends who may be working out with you or on similar equipment. Apparently, if you and a friend are in the gym, and you are both on the treadmill, you would immediately be able to share data on things like speed and time so you can compete to see who can go the furthest the quickest. The coolest part is the patent claims you can share this data with people next to you in your gym or friends around the world who are working out at the same time using Wi-Fi or cellular network connection.

[via 9to5Mac]

The iPhone 4S is excluded from the sales block, presumably because it uses a different baseband chip to earlier Apple 3G-enabled devices. The iPad 2 WiFi + 3G, along with the iPhone 3G and iPhone 4, use Infineon wireless hardware, but Apple switched to Qualcomm GSM/CDMA hybrids for the iPhone 4S.

Motorola’s win in December was around a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensed patent, deemed essential to 3G/UMTS standards. The ruling this week is not believed to refer to a FRAND patent, however. Samsung is currently under investigation by the European Commission for potential antitrust behaviors around FRAND patent licensing, and it’s unclear if Motorola’s decision to enact the injunction this week will see it also placed under the EC microscope.

Interestingly, the sales ban only applies to Apple’s online store; physical German stores, including Apple’s own retail locations, are apparently free to continue selling the devices. “Even if some iPad and iPhone models are currently unavailable in our online store in Germany,” an Apple statement (machine-translated) said, “customers will likely have no problem finding these devices in our stores or [at] authorized dealers.”

Update: Apple has given us a fuller statement (non-translated):

“While some iPad and iPhone models are not available through Apple’s online store in Germany right now, customers should have no problem finding them at one of our retail stores or an authorized reseller. Apple is appealing this ruling because Motorola repeatedly refuses to license this patent to Apple on reasonable terms, despite having declared it an industry standard patent seven years ago.”

[via FOSS Patents]

The patent in question covers scrolling display behaviors, namely the way in which a software list shows that the user has reached the bottom. Apple argued that its implementation, as patented, differs from any previous list systems. Samsung, however, argued that the patent hadn’t exceeded the nine month period during which it could be contested, and that no sales ban should be implemented until that had expired.

The court agreed, and Samsung free to sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1N in the German market. The variant has a tweaked bezel, thicker at the shorter sides than at the longer edges, with forward-facing speakers, and was created to work around Apple’s design patents. Apple complained, but courts decided that the design of the 10.1N was sufficiently different.

However, earlier this week a German judge upheld Apple’s original sales injunction against the Tab 10.1, and Samsung has seen two 3G standards-related cases against its rivals thrown out. Now the Korean company faces EU antitrust investigations over whether it misused the patented wireless technologies.

The official ruling is not available, but according to Foss Patents, the headline of the ruling says it all with the title, which reads “Initial Determination Granting Microsoft’s Motion for Summary Determination of Respondents First Affirmative Defense of Patent Misuse.” The ITC commission can review the decision, but apparently, it’s not common for the commission to review this sort of order. This means Barnes & Noble’s suit is dead in the water unless it has other tricks up its sleeves.

Foss Patents says that the problem is that even if all of Barnes & Noble’s claims against Microsoft were accurate, that still would not be enough to fight Microsoft using a patent misuse defense. It appears at this point that Barnes & Noble doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on, and it will be forced to license Android patents from Microsoft just as all other major tablet and smartphone makers building on the Android platform have been forced to do. Barnes & Noble also appealed to the Department of Justice and is unlikely to win any support with the DOJ after failing to win any support with the ITC.

[via Foss Patents]

Warning bells had rung in 2011, when Samsung attempted to use its 3G/UMTS patent portfolio to attack Apple over the iPhone and other 3G-enabled devices such as the iPad. Apple argued it was covered to use the technology by its agreement with Qualcomm, which supplied the wireless hardware used in the iOS smartphone; Samsung countered that its own licensing agreement with Qualcomm didn’t in fact cover Apple’s use of the modems.

That caught the attention of the European Commission, which began to question whether Samsung’s use of 3G patents in the case met with previously agreed standardization policy. The patented technology itself isn’t in question – in fact the patents have already been deemed vital to 3G standards – but Samsung may have inadvertently revealed that it refused to license them to Apple under so-called “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) terms agreed in 1998.

Whether or not that’s the case will be questioned during the EU’s investigation, announced earlier today, with Samsung facing allegations of potential antitrust behavior. However, two rejected cases Samsung had hoped to bring against Apple in German courts – each around use of patented 3G tech – suggest there’s more afoot than has been publicly discussed so far.

If found guilty by the EU, Samsung could be fined up to 10-percent of the annual revenue it makes deemed related to the topic of the investigation. With record smartphone revenues in 2011, that’s something the company would undoubtedly like to avoid. The EU has been keen to point out that an investigation is not necessarily an indication of guilt, and told the Washington Post that the decision to undertake an enquiry was of its own choosing, not prompted by complaints from Samsung’s rivals. For the moment, Samsung looks free to sell its own products in most markets, but the choices the company made to fight back against Apple and others could end up coming back to haunt it.

“The European Commission has opened a formal investigation” the EC said today in a statement, “to assess whether Samsung Electronics has abusively, and in contravention of a commitment it gave to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), used certain of its standard essential patent rights to distort competition in European mobile device markets, in breach of EU antitrust rules.”

Samsung, among other companies, agreed to FRAND terms back when 3G standards were settled upon in Europe. As part of that agreement, Samsung is obligated to license out the wireless technology it filed patents for to other manufacturers, and to do so at rates that are not extortionate.

However, Samsung has cited the patents in claims against Apple in 2011, arguing that although it has licensed the technology to radio chipset manufacturer Qualcomm, Apple is not covered by that agreement. Apple argues differently, though neither it nor Qualcomm will release details of their contracts for Samsung to look into.

“In 2011, Samsung sought injunctive relief in various Member States’ courts against competing mobile device makers based on alleged infringements of certain of its patent rights which it has declared essential to implement European mobile telephony standards. The Commission will investigate, in particular, whether in doing so Samsung has failed to honour its irrevocable commitment given in 1998 to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) to license any standard essential patents relating to European mobile telephony standards on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The Commission will examine whether such behaviour amounts to an abuse of a dominant position prohibited by Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU)” European Commission

However, two recent attempts to use 3G patents against Apple have been rejected in German courts, though specific reasons for the failure of the cases have not been given. No estimate for the length of time that the EC investigation will take has been given.

Two distinct possibilities have been suggested for the court’s rejection of the cases. Apple could have presented a sufficient technical explanation for the judge’s decision, countering Samsung’s allegations of IP misuse. Alternatively, Apple could have been deemed to in fact have a license to use the technology, most likely gaining coverage under its supplier deal with Qualcomm.

Samsung has sought access to Apple’s contracts with Qualcomm but so far been refused. The Korean firm alleges that Apple is not, in fact, covered by any deal with Qualcomm; meanwhile, Apple has fired back with suggestions that Samsung purposefully modified its deal with Qualcomm to exclude it.

Two remaining patent suits are in the pipeline for the German courts, with Samsung alleging non-standards-related infringement. The company could also appeal today’s decision, and the ruling last week, to the High Court.

Specifically, it will use data about crime statistics, demographics, and other less hot-button factors like the geography of the terrain and weather information. The concept is being referred to as the “avoid ghetto” app though of course Microsoft is trying to be as clinical and neutral as it possibly can. No doubt many users would highly appreciate this kind of functionality in their GPS. There are also people who use GPS technology for walking directions, when the profile of a certain neighborhood becomes much more important.

Then again, many more simply want their GPS to tell them how to get to their destination as quickly as possible, no matter what hazards may lie in their way. Microsoft’s app idea is not one of extreme necessity, and there’s a growing debate about whether or not it should be considered racist. For now, it’s still just an idea written down on a piece of paper but if it ever materializes into something, the debate may get more intense.

[via SCPR, Photo via lovebridotorg]

Exact details of the patents involved have not been given, nor has Intel said exactly what it will be doing with the new technology. It’s also unclear if any of the technologies around RealDVD, RealNetworks’ DVD ripping system, are included; Real was prevented from putting the app on sale after it was decided it fell foul of the DMCA.

“The acquisition also enhances our ability to continue to offer richer experiences and innovative solutions to end users across a wide spectrum of devices” Intel says, “including through Ultrabook devices, smartphones and digital media.”

If, when documentation around the court’s decision is released, the former turns out to be true, Samsung could push ahead with its remaining patent suits and still stand a chance of winning against Apple. However, if the German court has decided that Samsung has, in effect, exhausted its rights under the patents, that would be a far more significant decision.

That, it’s suggested, would potentially see all bar one of Samsung’s remaining patent complaints rejected, leaving the company’s legal battle in relative tatters. Apple continues to claim that its use of the patented technology is covered by its deal with Qualcomm, which supplies certain radio chips, and that it has no further obligation to Samsung.

Samsung has demanded access to the Qualcomm contracts though is yet to gain copies; the company has said that it believes the information the documentation contains could have a huge impact on its various cases against Apple worldwide.

What this patent outlines is both everything Siri can already do as well as some rather interesting things Apple has in the bag for the near future. What this patent details is how Siri will be able to in the future work with phrases such as “Sorry, I can’t purchase that,” for example. This most recent move into e-commerce follows perfectly with how Apple has been giving its smart devices the ability to purchase items on the fly, most notably inside Apple stores, completely employee free save for the back-room pickup.

Apple’s patent involving Siri here has the app perhaps even working with the newly updated iBookstore or the iTunes stores as well. Physical items though are what we’re most interested in here, Siri looking to work with groups like Best Buy to both check inventory for items* and purchase them by speaking only. *Last month, users gained this ability in full working order thanks to Siri integration with Wolfram Alpha. Soon the next step will be able to be taken.

Credited inventors on this particular patent include such big names as Thomas Robert Gruber, Adam John Cheyer, Didier Rene Guzzoni, Richard Donald Giuli, Marcello Bastea-forte, Christopher Dean Brigham, and Harry Joseph Saddler. Employees of Siri, including Dag Kittlaus, are still in the guts of this patent. Of that you can be sure.

[via AppleInsider]

Meanwhile, Samsung has filed a request with the US District Court in California to gain access to documentation detailing the nature of Apple’s agreement with Qualcomm, the company that provides several of the chipsets and radios in a number of iOS devices. “We need all agreements pursuant to which Qualcomm supplies or supplied ‘Qualcomm MDM6610’ chipsets to any person of entity and all documents that evidence, reflect or refer to the use by Apple of Qualcomm chipsets in iPhones or iPads” Samsung’s court documentation acquired by The Korea Times says.

The company is hoping to identify any contractual flaw that might invalidate Apple’s argument that it is covered by Qualcomm’s licensing of Samsung patented tech. Samsung claims that Apple should pay-up on the technology it uses, while Apple says it has coverage automatically as a Qualcomm customer. “One of Apple’s primary defenses is that it is entitled to use the chipsets at issue” the Korean firm’s legal team points out.

If Samsung succeeds, it plans to submit the contracts to ongoing cases in Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, the UK, Australia, France and Korea.

As for Apple’s attempt to block Samsung sales in Europe, the suit apparently covers the Galaxy S Plus and the Galaxy S II, as well as the modified Galaxy Tab 10.1N Samsung produced explicitly to work around a previous injunction. Apple’s initial attempt to claim the 10.1N was insufficiently changed was rejected.

Pantech will likely sign a royalty agreement with Microsoft that will involve paying $5 per Android device sold, a fee that other Android OEMs have been rumored to pay, including HTC, Samsung, and LG. Samsung had agreed to pay Microsoft in a deal signed last September and LG, the second largest South Korean handset maker, had just signed a deal last week.

Microsoft is now collecting fees from nearly 70 percent of Android device makers and the animosity between it and Google are apparent in their public spats via Twitter and blog posts. Microsoft is currently suing Motorola over similar Android patent issues, but Motorola is also in the process of being acquired by Google. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

As for Pantech, the company showed a strong effort at CES 2012 with its Pantech Burst 4G LTE smartphone and its Pantech Element 4G LTE tablet. Make sure to check out our hands-on for those two devices, both of which are heading to AT&T.

The patents in the sale cover things like GSM, 3G and LTE mobile devices. The video patents have to do with encoding optimization. Nokia gets to keep the license to use the tech as part of the sale. The 450 patents sold off are only 1/60th of its patent portfolio of pending and granted patents. Out of those 450 patents, 350 of them are considered essential and are assumed to be used by other firms.

This raises the question of why sell the patents. The easy guess is that Nokia is hard up for money in the face of very hard competition and sagging sales of its devices globally. Sisvel is using the patents to deepen its pool of patents for LTE technology.

[via Nokia]

“We are pleased with today’s favorable outcome for Motorola Mobility” Scott Offer, senior vice president and general counsel of Motorola Mobility said in a statement. “Motorola Mobility has worked hard over the years to develop technology and build an industry-leading intellectual property portfolio.  We are proud to leverage this broad and deep portfolio to create differentiated innovations that enhance the user experience.”

The patents Apple had cited covered touchscreen and multitouch use, along with software installation technology. Different touchscreen gestures, such as taps or swipes, are covered in Apple’s IP, as well as multitouch recognition for two or more fingers. The company filed the suit back in late 2010.

Motorola fired back with patent infringement counter-claims of its own, amid a general industry atmosphere of heightened legal competitiveness as Android, iOS and other platforms shuffle for dominance. Motorola faces an ongoing case filed by Microsoft, with the ITC finding in favor of Microsoft in a preliminary ruling last December.

The preliminary ruling is usually a good indication of which way the final ruling will decide, but not a definite one. HTC discovered this to its cost last year, after an initially favorable preliminary ruling against Apply in a complaint lodged by S3 Graphics – which HTC was in the process of acquiring – saw a marked turnaround when the ITC decided against S3′s claims in the final judgement.

Discovered by AppleInsider, the patent application called “Sensor Based Display Environment” describes a 3D display environment in which the orientation data from an iOS device’s onboard gyroscope and compass sensors are used to navigate the system. The environment is motion-controlled because traditional means of navigating the system through touch or stylus is difficult due to the limited screen size.

For instance, users could navigate an iPhone’s 3D interface as if it were looking through an “imaginary camera viewfinder.” By moving the iPhone around you can see into the digital world or 3D interface, similar to an augmented reality experience. This virtual room that user looks at could have different objects, perhaps apps, on the walls, floor, and ceiling that can be selected. These walls or sides can be snapped to by a preset action, such as shaking the phone.

This Apple patent application was first filed back in July of 2010 and is credited to Patrick Piedmonte.

“Hey Google – we are the 70% #anotherandroidlicense” head of communications Frank Shaw opened the salvo with, before asking Google “Can we just agree to drop the patents-as-weapons meme?” It’s always been Microsoft’s argument that, in fact, cross-licensing deals is the most mature and sustainable way of managing the industry, something Shaw is keen to hammer home. “When effective licensing enables companies to share IP,” his tweet continued, “the metaphor falls apart.”

Shaw’s sniping was soon joined by Microsoft EVP and General Counsel Brad Smith, picking up the #anotherandroidlicense hashtag and suggesting that “It’s time to recognize that in #patent world, lawsuits are the 1%; license agreements are the 99%.” Other Microsoft staff joined in the fun.

Google is yet to comment on the LG licensing news, but we can’t imagine it’s particularly pleased that LG decided to deal rather than hold out. That decision – meaning Microsoft now has 70-percent of the Android marketplace paying it royalties of some level – puts further attention on the ongoing suit between Microsoft and Motorola Mobility, which Google is in the process of attempting to acquire.

Microsoft is currently suing Motorola, alleging its Android devices infringe on several of the software giant’s patents. A preliminary ruling by the ITC found in favor of Microsoft, though a final review and ruling are still in the pipeline.

[via TechCrunch]

“We are pleased to have built upon our longstanding relationship with LG to reach a mutually beneficial agreement” Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft’s deputy general counsel said in a statement today. “Together with our 10 previous agreements with Android and Chrome OS device manufacturers, including HTC, Samsung and Acer, this agreement with LG means that more than 70 percent of all Android smartphones sold in the US are now receiving coverage under Microsoft’s patent portfolio.”

HTC signed its deal with Microsoft all the way back in 2010, while Samsung held out until late last year before agreeing to terms. Both companies also apparently agreed to work with Microsoft on Windows Phone, pushing out handsets using the platform as well as opening up their wallets to help with marketing and promotion of the OS. It’s unclear if LG has also been roped into similar obligations.

That leaves Motorola Mobility still holding out and refusing to license Microsoft IP. The two companies are embroiled in ongoing legal sparring, with Microsoft alleging Motorola has infringed on several of its patents with its Android line-up. Last December, the ITC’s preliminary ruling found in favor of Microsoft.

IBM landed 6,180 patents over they year, a gain of 5% from 2010 when it had 5,896 patents the second place firm for landing patents was a bit of a surprise to me, Samsung took that spot with 4,894. I wonder how many of those will be used to beat Apple up in court. Canon took the third spot with 2,821 patents, Panasonic landed 2,559, and Toshiba had 2,483.

The firms I expected to be in the top of the list are surprisingly far down. Microsoft was in sixth spot with 2,311 patents, Sony took 7th with 2,286, and Seiko Epson had 1,533 patents. One of the larger makers of computers for a variety of firms – Hon Hai Precision – had 1,514 patents. Hitachi had 1,465 patents to round out the top ten. I really thought Intel would be way up the list, but the company was in 16th with 1,244 patents.

[via PC World]

The key in the whole massive body of texts in this set of patent applications comes in a bit of a shroud. When you get past all the information about the Thunderbolt cords and ports we already know, you find a sentence that refers to a portable media player. While that could mean essentially anything, you know and I know that they’re talking about mobile devices such as the iPad and the iPhone. Read it aloud right here, straight from the application:

“the present invention, connection may also be a new type of connection. … a connection may be provided between a portable media player and a display, a computer and a portable media player, or between other types of devices.” – Thunderbolt patent via Patently Apple

This may very well mean that Apple will be reengineering the known Thunderbolt port to be small enough to interact with the famously thin mobile devices they’ve got on the market now. The transfer of data, the streaming of media, and the charging of devices could be improved by this technology. There are three patents in this set, one having been filed one day before Apple introduced the Thunderbolt port, the other two about three weeks before the first Apple Thunderbolt display was shown to the public. Exciting stuff!

[via Patently Apple]

The art you see here came from patent number 8,083,593 that was granted to Microsoft in late December. It shows a way to have a DVR app running along with TV content to allow the ability to record media and pause on the console. The awesome thing is that the tech allows the gamer to be playing a game and recording TV content at the same time.

Microsoft has been adding in a lot of media options of late with Netflix and more. The writing on the wall is clear; Microsoft wants the Xbox to be for more than gaming. I would love to be able to shed my satellite cable boxes and just toss a Xbox on top of the TV instead. I hope that the tech will actually make it to market. Sometimes patents are just ways to force others to pay; I hope that’s not the case here.

[via Kotaku]

Geekwire reports that the patent app would take into account crime data and would route the walker around neighborhoods with high incidence of crime. The system would route the walker on a path that would avoid areas with crime data that is above a certain threshold. The directions would route the user based in part on things the user has cared about in the past.

Presumably, if the user ticked a box to avoid high-crime areas, they would always get directions that avoid those areas. Avoiding crime isn’t all the mapping system would do; it would also have options for other things like avoiding open areas where the walker might be subject to the weather. It doesn’t appear that this feature was ever implemented. Perhaps Microsoft feared a backlash at labeling certain neighborhoods as high crime.

[via GeekWire]

According to GigaOM, it seems like gradually over the years, TiVo has been “transforming itself from a CE player to a licensing entity”. The company has been losing end-user subscribers for years now, only recently being able to increase subscriptions through partnerships with Virgin and RCN. Moreover, the only way TiVo has really been able make bank in the most recent years was, well, via patent lawsuits, followed by generally lucrative settlements, like this particular one with AT&T. Just last year, Dish Network and Echostar consented to fork over a total of $500 million to TiVo to settle a lawsuit brought against their, well, you guessed it, DVRs.

It seems like that AT&T can’t get a legal break, whether it be from the court, or the FCC. SlashGear readers, what do you think? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comment section below.

The 3D item you’re seeing in the main image here is for Final Cut Pro’s Motion Module, this relating to 3D camera direction in a simulated space. You may have seen such effects in videos made by Vincent a few weeks ago in the utterly fancy intro to his own reviews. We’ve seen similar things in apps with more money and power under the hood – might be time to rethink such features, eh devs? Don’t want the mighty Apple coming down on you with a crushing law blow.

Then there’s the omnipotent MagSafe – not the original one that broke all the time, the second one – the sweet one I’ve got plugged into this MacBook Pro right this second. Finally Apple can say they own it, legally, and with a whole lot less exposed wires, too. As far as hardware goes beyond that, they added the Apple Thunderbolt Display to their repertoire, the iMac from seasons past, and a laundry list of smaller items, such as, believe it or not, the iOS calculator icon. Fun stuff!

[via Patently Apple]

Financial details behind this most recent set of transactions have not been revealed at the moment, nor are the terms quite yet apparent. Google and IBM have kept such details to themselves in the past as well. Google has acquired several thousand patents inside the 12 months of 2011 alone, with more sure to unfold inside the early months of 2012 if I may be so bold. It’s pretty clear at this point that IBM has found Google to be a suitable place to move their patents to, perhaps (and again, this is conjecture) due to the fact that Google’s Android OS had been the subject of so many law bombs throughout the last year.

What we’re seeing here is patents for everything from “Selecting and Rendering a Section of a Web Page” to the “Transfer of Web Applications Between Devices.” Perhaps most interesting is the one by the name of Computer Phone, whose abstract reads thusly:

Computer phone

Abstract

A computer integrated cordless phone. The phone can include a cordless handset transceiver configured for coupling to an antenna shared with a wireless network adapter through a multiplexer/demultiplexer so that both of the cordless handset transceiver and the wireless network adapter transmit and receive data within a common wireless frequency spectrum. In a preferred embodiment, the cordless handset transceiver can include a further configuration for coupling to a central processing unit, audio processing circuitry and power supply within a computing device shared with the wireless network adapter. Notably, the common wireless frequency spectrum can include the ISM frequency band.

That file contains patent filings leading all the way back to April of 1987, one written up by Nishimura which calls for a “Wireless phone system communicatively combined with a computer.” Interesting stuff! Check out that filing in U.S. Patent Document 4,661,659 and the one for Computer Phone in U.S. Patent Document 7,499,726. Enjoy, and expect more soon!

[via SEO by the Sea]

The presence detection technology can be used to automatically turn on a device when it senses a user’s presence. The face recognition technology then can be used to unlock a device in lieu of entering a password. Devices can also be configured to recognize faces from a group of users such as among family or at the workplace.

Apple’s solution for facial recognition relies on a simple weighted difference map, rather than the traditional and more computationally heavy correlation matching technology. In this way, it uses less system resources and could reduce the impact of lighting and skin variation. It can also tap directly into the GPU of an iOS device or MacBook, reducing the load on software and relying more on the hardware.

[via PatentlyApple]

This patent focuses on the oscillator signal and circuit of a touchscreen, technology that is integral to how users interact with a multitouch device. Previous resistive touchscreens can only recognize a single touch input no matter how many objects are touching the screen. Capacitive touchscreens can rely on oscillating signals to track inputs over a substrate but creating a precise ciruit-based oscillator is difficult.

Apple’s patent provides a solution that uses calibration logic circuitry that compares signal oscillation against a reference signal and then accordingly tunes its clock frequency. This offers an accurate capacitive display that can detect multiple touches as well as hovers and near touches.

[via AppleInsider]

The recent ITC ruling will take effect April 19, 2012, banning the sale and importation of some of HTC’s smartphones. However, the ruling found HTC violating only one of the four patents claimed by Apple and HTC has already developed a workaround. Hence, the Taiwanese manufacturer announced that the ruling was actually a victory for the company.

During a visit at HTC headquarters, Rubin spoke with journalists, echoing the same optimism, saying that the ruling would be “a way to settle this situation.” Rubin also said at the briefing that Google’s Android platform has seen a 200,000 increase in daily activations since three months ago, now hitting more than 700,000 a day.

[via TNW]

The reworked tablet had been prompted by Apple’s original preliminary injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1, convincing the German courts that the Korean slate’s design overlapped with those it had registered itself. Samsung returned with a slightly modified model, the Tab 10.1N, with thicker bezels on the sides and front-facing speaker grills.

That, Apple argued, was insufficient, dragging Samsung back into the courtroom to demand a second ban. The Cupertino company was also forced to detail its own suggestions as to what Samsung could do in order to avoid overstepping the iPad, leading to the somewhat bizarre guidelines of a non-rectangular chassis and a “cluttered” UI.

Bloomberg reports that HTC has finished the workaround to avoid the patent Apple hold involving user interfaces. HTC CEO Peter Chou said, “It’s [the infringing tech] actually quite rarely used.” HTC still maintains that while it lost the patent case and was found to be infringing on an Apple patent, that the suit was a win for it.

HTC says that out of the ten cases of infringement that Apple alleged, the ITC only found infringement on one of the patents. The courts gave HTC until April 19, 2012 to comply with the ruling. With the workaround already, complete HTC is well ahead of the game.

[via Bloomberg]

“We are pleased with the ITC’s initial determination finding Motorola violated four claims of a Microsoft patent,” said Microsoft in a statement today. “As Samsung, HTC, Acer and other companies have recognized, respecting others’ intellectual property through licensing is the right path forward.”

This latest ruling adds more pressure to Google’s Android platform and its partners, which have been besieged by patent suits. In a separate ITC ruling yesterday, HTC was slapped with a ban of of its Android devices due to violating an Apple patent. This patent, however, is a system level technology that could implicate the entire Android platform as a whole.

[via AllThingsD]

The first of these applications details a button which allows the user to switch apps on their iPhone while they remain on a call. This application shows that you’ll be able to finger tap the application switch icon on the same screen as their phone dialer, then switch back with a “Touch to return to call” bar above the display when they want to do so. This functionality has essentially been replaced by the multitasking abilities of iOS 5 since this application was made. This original patent was filed in Q1 of 2008 and credits Senior VP of iPhone Software Scott Forstall and team members Greg Christie, Stephen Lemay, Marcel Van Os and Imran Chaudhri.

Next there’s the second generation iPod Shuffle which does indeed credit Steve Jobs as one of its designers. Interestingly, the parts that are made up of broken lines in the image above are not claimed in the patent while the main bulk of the device is. Finally there’s a “Microperforated and backlit displays having alternative display capabilities,” this relating to an earlier patent win which also has to do with all the bits on your Apple computer that are invisible until a light comes on behind them. Think of the breathing light indicator at the front of your MacBook, for example.

[via Patently Apple]

“This decision is a win for HTC and we are gratified that the commission affirmed the judge’s determination on the ’721 and ’983 patents, and reversed its decision on the ’263 patent and partially on the ’647 patent. We are very pleased with the determination and we respect it. The ’647 patent is a small UI experience and HTC will completely remove it from all of our phones soon” HTC investor statement

HTC has until April 19 to comply with the decision of the ITC, which either means modifying offending products or ceasing import of them by that point. It seems from the company’s reaction to the ruling that it will be opting to tweak Android to bring it in line, something HTC claims will demand little effort.

“Since the infringing elements identified by the ITC involve and impact only a very minimal part of the user interface” HTC said in a statement to the Taiwanese stock exchange, “we will remove it as soon as possible and sell non-infringing products.”

Although we’ve seen bizarrely upbeat reactions to apparently negative rulings from companies in the past, IP opinion seems to be leaning on the side of HTC with this particular judgement. “If I’m HTC – and particularly if I’m Google – I’m feeling a lot better today than if I’m Apple” former ITC vice-chairman Ron Cass has said, the elements the Cupertino company failed to persuade the court on being arguably more important than what, exactly, it did convince about.

Still, HTC faces more challenges than simply legal complaints. The company’s recent revenues took a nose-dive as its late 2011 line-up failed to hold up to the competition, with HTC saying it will “focus on the product” next year to turn its fortunes around. That could include a pair of flagship devices, one Windows Phone and the other Android, details of which leaked yesterday.