Apple v. Qualcomm: You win some, you lose some

By

Qualcomm patents
The ITC sided with Apple over Qualcomm today in one case, but things went the other way in a separate decision earlier in the afternoon.
Photo: Qualcomm

Just hours after an International Trade Commission judge ruled in favor of Qualcomm in a patent infringement lawsuit with Apple, the Commission as a whole made the iPhone maker the winner in a separate dispute between the pair of companies.

This is a demonstration of how much acrimony there is between these two, who were once close allies.

Judge calls for iPhone import ban due to patent infringements

By

Qualcomm patents
Qualcomm scored another victory in its legal battle with Apple.
Photo: Qualcomm

Some iPhone models could soon be blocked from coming into the U.S. after a judge recently ruled that Apple infringed on Qualcomm’s patents.

ITC Judge MaryJoan McNamara found that iPhone infringes on one of three patents in Qualcomm’s case against Apple. She subsequently said she will recommend an import ban on iPhones, but a panel of judges could still save Apple.

Appeals court reverses $234 million patent-infringement ruling against Apple

By

A8 chip
Turns out the A7, A8 and A8X didn't infringe on a patent held by the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Photo: Apple

An appeals court just reversed the 2015 decision against Apple made in a patent-infringement lawsuit brought by the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The original court ruled that the iPhone-maker owed the university $234 million for infringing on patented microchip technology in the iPhone and iPad.

Apple challenges Qualcomm patents as legal battle rages on

By

Qualcomm patents
Apple to Qualcomm: "I wish I knew how to quit you." But the companies continue to do business even as they drag each other to court.
Photo: Qualcomm

“Coopetition” best describes the relationship between Apple and Qualcomm. Wireless modems made by Qualcomm are used in iPhones even as the two companies are locked in a years-long patent dispute over billions of dollars.

The fight reached a new phase today as Apple challenged four Qualcomm patents, arguing they shouldn’t have been awarded in the first place.

Samsung wants retrial in patent infringement lawsuit with Apple

By

apple-asks-supreme-court-to-reject-samsungs-unexceptional-appeal-2-image-cultofandroidcomwp-contentuploads201602Galaxy-S6-edge-iPhone-6s-jpg
The Samsung patent infringement lawsuit isn't over, as the Android phone maker still tries to wiggle out of its punishment.
Photo: Ste Smith/Cult of Mac

Last month, a jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $539M for infringing on its patents. Now, the Korean company wants that decision thrown out.

It again says it should pay a far, far smaller amount for stealing many of the design elements of the iPhone.

Apple demands $1 billion from Samsung for patent infringement

By

Apple and Samsung return to court
Apple and Samsung are battling it out again.
Photo: Killian Bell/Cult of Mac

Apple wants Samsung to cough up a whopping $1 billion in damages for infringing iPhone design patents.

The two companies again returned to court this week over the long-running dispute, which first began seven years ago. Apple told jurors that Samsung should hand over all the profit it made on four devices that were heavily inspired by the iPhone. Samsung’s lawyers disagree.

Apple lays groundwork for bendable iPhone

By

Martin Hajek
A curved iPhone would be just a first step toward a bendable iPhone.
Photo: Martin Hajek

Apple today received a patent for a device with a bendable display. Sadly, that doesn’t mean that an clamshell iPhone is right around the corner. The wait for an iPad that be folded up and slipped in a pocket is probably still going to be a long one.

The patent was filed in 2016 because Apple is just preparing for the day when bendable displays are a reality.

Beats and Bose end their patent beef

By

Photo: Kārlis Dambrāns/Flickr
Photo: Kārlis Dambrāns/Flickr

A budding feud between Bose and Beats Electronics has ended with both sides settling out of court. Although the terms haven’t been made public, according to Bose the matter has been satisfactorily “resolved” and will no longer go to trial.

Both sides have agreed to pay their own costs and legal fees, and have asked the International Trade Commission to suspend its investigation into the disagreement.