July 21
(Bloomberg) — Apple Inc.’s victory over HTC Corp. in a patent dispute at the
U.S. International Trade Commission may slow the advance of rival Google Inc.’s
fast-growing Android operating system for mobile phones and tablets.
A trade judge found on July 15 that HTC infringed two patents owned by Apple, whose
iPhone competes with Android-based devices, including those made by HTC. If his
decision is upheld, HTC may be prevented from bringing phones into the U.S.,
and companies such as Samsung Electronics Co. and Motorola Mobility Holdings
Inc. may find it more expensive to sell Android phones.
Android is poised to be the most-used smartphone software in a mobile market that may
reach $206.6 billion worldwide this year, according to IHS Inc. Google is under
attack from rivals including Apple and Microsoft Corp. that allege infringement
by handset makers that use Android.
Apple, which also has pending legal fights with Samsung and Motorola, is looking to
thwart rivals rather than extract payment for use of the patents, making it
more likely to hold out for a ban on imports, said Ron Laurie, managing
director of Inflexion Point Strategy LLC, which counsels companies on
purchasing intellectual property.
“This is
not about money,” Laurie, a former patent lawyer who is based in Palo Alto,
California, said in an interview. “This is about market share in the hottest
market out there.”
Taiwan-based HTC said it will appeal Administrative Law Judge Carl Charneski’s finding,
which is subject to review by the full six-member commission in Washington. The
smartphone maker, Asia’s second-biggest, denied violating Apple’s patents and
said it will use “all means possible” to defend itself in a statement after the
ruling
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, speaking at a Google Mobile Revolution conference in
Tokyo July 19, said he was “not too worried” about the litigation over Android.
Android is the fastest-growing operating system in the smartphone market, according to
researcher Gartner Inc. Google’s software powered half of all smartphones
bought in the U.S. in the six months that ended in March, Nielsen Inc. said.
Among large Android phone makers, HTC faces the biggest hurdles, because it holds few
patents of its own to tempt Apple into a cross-licensing agreement. Apple may
even refuse to license the patents, said Will Stofega, a program manager at
researcher IDC, leaving HTC struggling to produce a phone that works around
them.
“I don’t see Apple giving an inch,” Stofega said in an interview.
Apple may be more likely to sign a license accord with Samsung or Motorola. Still,
such deals may involve payments to Apple that would be passed along to Android
customers, said Florian Mueller, a Munich-based consultant.
Many of Google’s 39 licensees to make phones based on Android are smaller manufacturers
that have far less cash than HTC, Motorola and Samsung to defend against suits
and pay fees to patent holders, Mueller said.
Mountain View, California-based Google also faces other claims that Android encroaches
on patents. Microsoft, which makes a rival Windows system for mobile phones,
signed four patent licenses with Android device makers in the past month and
already has a deal with HTC.
Microsoft also sued Barnes & Noble Inc. after the bookseller refused to sign a
license for sales of the Android- powered Nook reader. Oracle Corp. contends
that Google used code from the Java operating system without permission and is
seeking billions of dollars in royalties.
HTC may have
some leverage in its dispute with Apple. The company agreed earlier this month
to buy S3 Graphics Co., which won an ITC patent ruling against Apple in June.
HTC also has its own pending case against Apple.
A final
decision in the Apple-HTC case will take months. The six-member commission is
expected to complete the case by December. If the panel agrees with the judge’s
finding, it may block HTC’s Android phone imports to the U.S. HTC also may seek
an order to delay any import ban until the appeals court rules, which might
take a year or more.
The case
is In the Matter Of Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices and
Related Software, 337-710, U.S. International Trade Commission (Washington).
Kodak Explores
Options for Digital-Imaging Patent Portfolio
Eastman
Kodak Co., the 131-year-old camera company, said it’s exploring “strategic
alternatives” for its digital- imaging patent portfolio.
The
portfolio includes more than 1,100 U.S. patents including processing, editing
and storing digital images, Rochester, New York-based Kodak said yesterday in a
statement.
Kodak’s
patents may be worth $2 billion or more and could attract bids from Apple Inc.,
Samsung Electronics Co. and LG Electronics, Mark Kaufman, an analyst at
Rafferty Capital Markets LLC in New York, said yesterday in an interview.
“If you
are a large consumer electronics manufacturer, you’ve got to sit up and take
notice,” said Kaufman, who has a “buy” rating on the shares. “The patents are
for cameras, and as a manufacturer you’re not going to the market today with a
smartphone without a camera.”
David
Lanzillo, a spokesman for Kodak, declined to comment beyond the statement.
Earlier
this month, the U.S. International Trade Commission failed to reach consensus
on Kodak’s claims that Apple and Research in Motion Ltd. infringe its
image-preview technology. It was the second delay by the Washington-based
agency in a case from which Kodak aims to extract $1 billion in licensing fees
from Apple and RIM. Apple and RIM deny infringing the patent.
“The ITC
process is taking longer than it should have so they are looking to get started
a competitive bidding process for the whole portfolio,” said Kaufman. “The
company needs money,” he said.
Kodak
said yesterday that there is “heightened market demand for intellectual
property,” according to the statement. The patents represent 10 percent of
Kodak’s total U.S. patent portfolio, the company said. Kodak hired Lazard Ltd.
as an adviser.
Kodak,
which traces its roots to 1880, was founded by George Eastman, who developed a
method for dry-plate photography and introduced the Kodak camera in 1888,
according to the company’s website.
The
company’s credit has deteriorated as it has shifted from traditional film to
digital cameras, accessories and printers. Kodak, which popularized photography
with its Brownie and Instamatic cameras, has been trying to drum up royalties
from its more than 1,000 digital-imaging patents to fund a shift to more modern
devices.
For more patent news,
click here.
Trademark
Borders Says
Objections Irrelevant, Contracts Won’t Be Kept
Borders
Group Inc., the bankrupt bookstore chain, said 99 objections from creditors are
irrelevant because the company’s liquidation means it won’t carry on any
contracts with business partners.
Starbucks
Corp.’s Seattle’s Best Coffee LLC unit said its intellectual property might be
improperly transferred because trademarked goods such as beverage-making
instructions haven’t been removed from Borders stores.
Borders
is scheduled to seek court approval today to liquidate its 399 remaining
stores. All objections from creditors should be overruled, the company said in
court papers filed July 19.
“Nonetheless,
the debtors and the liquidators have been, and will continue, working to
resolve all pending objections to narrow, if not resolve, all outstanding
issues” before today’s hearing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, Borders
said.
Borders, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has about 10,700 employees. A phased rollout will
close its stores by September. The company said it will complete the wind-down
under Chapter 11 and expects to be able to pay business partners.
The case is In re Borders Group Inc., 11-10614, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District
of New York (Manhattan).
For more trademark
news, click here.
Copyright
Evangelical Church
Seeks Destruction of ‘Salvation Boulevard’ Film
Comcast Corp., a unit of Sony Corp., IFC In Theaters LLC, and Mandalay Pictures LLC
were all sued for copyright infringement by a 125-year-old evangelical church.
The suit, filed July 14 in federal court in Chattanooga, Tennessee, is related to
Mandalay’s “Salvation Boulevard” film. The church seeks the destruction of all
copies of the film.
“Salvation Boulevard,” based on a novel of the same name by Larry Beinhart, was released
July 15. The film is a comedy about a charismatic evangelical pastor, played by
Pierce Brosnan, who is involved in a real estate development in a small western
town.
The Church of God, based in Cleveland, Tennessee, claims the film uses a cross
design that is “a substantial reproduction” of its own cross mark. The mark
seen in the firm is a mirror image of the church’s mark, for which it has a
copyright registration.
Included in the complaint are two still photos from the film, one showing a cross mark
displayed on the front of the fictional Church of the Third Millennium. A
second photo shows a character from the film wearing a vest embroidered with a
cross mark.
These marks are used without license from the church, according to court papers. The
church claims that the use of the allegedly infringing symbol in the film is
likely to “engender a false belief in the minds of the public and persons in
the trade and industry in general” that an affiliation exists between the
church and the film. This causes “irreparable harm, damage and injury to the
church,” according to court papers.
The church asked the court for an order barring the unauthorized use of its mark,
and an accounting and award of the profits from sales and other activities
related to the “Salvation Boulevard” film for goods and services that bear the
allegedly infringing symbol.
It also seeks an order for the destruction of all films, and promotional materials
containing the infringing mark, and awards of money damages, attorney fees and
litigation costs.
None of the defendants responded immediately to an e-mailed request for comment.
The church is represented by Mark S. Graham, Robert O. Fox and Michael J. Bradford
of Luedeka, Neely & Graham PC of Knoxville, Tennessee.
The case
is Church of God v. Mandalay Pictures LLC, 1:11- cv-00189, U.S. District Court,
Eastern District of Tennessee (Chattanooga).
For more copyright
news, click here.
IP Moves
Sunstein Firm Hires
Nancy Chiu Wilker for Life Sciences Group
Sunstein
Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP hired Nancy Chiu Wilker for its life sciences
practice group, the Boston-based IP specialty firm said in a statement.
Wilker
does patent and trademark acquisition and IP-related transactional work. She’s
helped clients acquire patents in a range of biotech areas, including
transgenic plants and animals, cancer biomarkers, stem cells, new genes,
vaccines, antibodies, biological and small molecule chemical therapeutics, and
nucleic acid and protect detection and analysis technologies.
She
previously worked in-house.
Wilker
has an undergraduate degree I biology and biochemistry from Colorado State
University, a doctorate in immunology from Harvard University and a law degree
from Suffolk University.
