Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Aeton Law Partners
About
Posts

Post has attachment
A new precedent for insurance liability?  Last Monday the Connecticut Supreme Court In Recall Total Information Management, Inc. v. Federal Insurance Company, affirmed a previous decision that denied coverage for more than $6 million dollars.  Back in 2007, IBM contracted with Recall who subcontracted with Executive Logistics to transport computer tapes that fell off the truck containing personal information of over 500,000 former and current IBM employees. Although there was no evidence any information was compromised, the company spent the $6 million dollars informing their employees and monitoring their credit.  The court ruled that the tapes did not amount to a “personal injury” as defined in their contract.  Perhaps this will hold true for future data breaches.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
It’s a victory for #Apple over #Samsung.  Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a lower court’s decision from 2012; well, most of the decision.  A unanimous jury decided that #Samsung violated a number of Apple’s patents and ordered #Samsung to pay over $1 billion dollars in 2012, which was later reduced to $930 million.  While the Federal Circuit Court agreed with Samsung’s wrongdoing, the court has remanded the decision to the lower court to reduce Samsung’s total damages penalty.  Perhaps the court is sympathetic to Samsung, but a large fee , whatever it may be should deter #Samsung from any patent infringement in the future.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
The English courts have put a stop to illegal streaming.  In 20th Century Fox v. Sky UK, Judge Birss has forced websites to shut down who “ha[ve] actual knowledge of another person using their service to infringe copyright” based on Section 97A of the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act of 1988.  

In this case, Popcorn Time System was a an application that was downloaded by consumers onto their personal computers. Although the Popcorn Time System was only used as a media player and did not host the copyrighted content, it did allow for an index of material the consumer could choice from and directed them to other sites. Using BitTorrent protocol, the film content was merged from smaller pieces into one file that can be viewed on the media player. 
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Google wants to buy your patents.  Yes, Google.  In an effort to “promote innovation” Google is providing patent holders the opportunity to sell patent assets in hopes it will reduce friction in the patent licensing and enforcement arena.  Google will be running its Patent Purchase Promotion from May 8, 2015 to May 22, 2015.  Sounds like an interesting project but how many patent holders will be interested in selling… and at what price?
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
 Do you have a right of “privacy” in your Facebook account? Not according to the courts. Judges in recent cases have turned to Facebook profiles of injured plaintiffs during the discovery process to reveal information about their claims.  Although Facebook allows the user to set their profile to “private” and even deactivate their accounts, Judges in cases have disagreed. In Ingrid & Isabel, LLC v. Baby Be Mine, LLC, a Judge allowed the production of comments on a company’s Facebook page as evidence of a trademark infringement. The lesson learned here is that Facebook is a site for social media, and there is nothing private about anything social!
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Has Google been diverting web traffic? E.U. officially charged Google with antitrust violations today after a five year long investigation.  The E.U. competition commissioner, Margrethe Vestager is visiting Washington for antitrust conferences which may have triggered this decision.  It seems the E.U. believes that filing charges will encourage Google to settle before something is found.  Well it has been five years and the E.U. is still looking.  Perhaps there is nothing to find.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
No Apple Watch for Switzerland? It looks like Apple may have a problem with releasing their new product Apple Watch in Switzerland. There is a company, Leonard Timepieces, which has a trademark and exclusive rights over the word “apple.”  The company’s trademark is for jewelry products, and this includes watches. In Switzerland, trademarks expire after 10 years, but trademark owners have an opportunity to file for an extension.  Although the “apple” trademark will expire in December, will this present a problem for a release of the Apple Watch in the future?  We will just have to wait until December to find out. 
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Last month we discussed the Federal Trade Commission’s new proposed net neutrality regulations. Well guess what? Two companies have filed suit against the FCC for these regulations, but are these companies just being difficult? Although the lawsuits may be “subject to dismissal” according to FCC spokesperson, they may want to keep their eyes open for what is coming next.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
#Bing is getting into the bracket business! March Madness is not only about college basketball teams competing for the National Champion title, but it is also about spectators and their predictions.  In past years, brackets have been filled out on websites like ESPN and Yahoo, but now #Bing? Bing’s bracket builder takes the experience to a new level by using algorithms from 10 years of data to assist the bracket builder. “… the average person follows no more than five teams. If you have 64 teams in the bracket, how do you pick for the rest of the match-ups?” With features like auto-fill and scenario options, #Bing may be the bracket of choice this year. 
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Be careful where you click!  Back in 2004, Appistry Inc. met with #Amazon engineers about their new computer technology, but Appistry did not know that this meeting would result in a lawsuit over patent infringement. Perhaps revealing detailed information about their new technology was a bad idea, but agreeing to a contract with a forum selection clause? That could be even more detrimental in the long run.
 
#Amazon claims Appistry agreed to not only a forum selection clause, but also gave up all their patent rights just from the click of a mouse.  That doesn't sound like something a company would do knowingly.  Either way, #Amazon filed a motion to transfer the case to their home state of Washington in July 2014 which was granted last week.  Guess we have to see how this one turns out in court.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded