Samsung has already suffered significant losses in its latest patent trial with Apple, but a grievous slip on the part of the Korean tech giant's lawyers has left the company saddled with an additional $2 million fine for leaking the details of a patent deal between Apple and Nokia.
Its all fun and games until the lawyers arrive. The way it works today, if you say ridiculous things on a news interview, there is a good chance someone is going to put it online. If it is popular online, there is a good chance someone is going to make a funny song about it. And, if the song is popular, there is good chance someone is going to start selling it. Now, at what point do you get back involved in the process you started? Right there at the last part -- when someone starts selling it, and is not paying you for saying ridiculous things in the first place. And, since you are suing people anyway, why not include Apple, too? Welcome to the way things work today.
When China decides to seriously protect intellectual property, one imagines the government will have quite a massive wall of work in front of them. As the nation that holds the global reputation for turning technological piracy into an art, China could stand to bring forward some high-profile cases and show the world that it is serious about protecting copyrights and patents. Instead, China has chosen the path of irony, and righteously sues foreign companies, like Apple, for absurd copyright infringement.
Like adopting a pet or purchasing a car, you might think that dropping the cash for pricey software means that you’re the sole owner of that one user license. But as we recently discovered ourselves, there is absolutely no truth to that. The reality of the matter is that your collection of software is more like your collection of DVDs—you pay for the right to use it as long as it’s in your possession, but the content and the software itself still belongs to the publisher. A recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit appeals court in Seattle supports this notion. The ruling states that you don’t really own software you’ve purchased if the company who published it says so in their user license.
This past Monday, the internet, newspapers and television were all a-buzz with news that Jailbreaking your iPhone was no longer a practice frowned upon by the law. The Library of Congress, which holds sway over the U.S. Copyright Office, announced that a number of exemptions to legislation governing how consumers may employ the digtial software and hardware they own would be made. Those exemptions, now in effect, have a significant effect on how and where a number of the technologies we see everyday are used.
What are the changes that the Library of Congress has ordered? How do the changes effect the buying public? Why is everyone so excited? As usual, Mac|Life has the answers you're looking for.