Commercial Roundup has some catching up to do this week. See the jumbo installment below.
Commercial Roundup – April 16, 2024
Apple’s App Store practices didn’t violate Sherman Act, did run afoul of California unfair competition law
Check out U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers’s Rule 52 Order After Trial on the Merits in the Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc. case at Rule 52 Order 9-10-21
Apple Loses $382 Million on Trade Dress Verdict
Apple v. Samsung Saga
In 2012 and 2013, two Silicon Valley juries awarded Apple a total of $929,860,041 for Samsung's use in its smartphones and tablets of three intellectual property types — design patents, utility patents, and trade dress (or overall image).
On May 18, 2015, the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment that
Federal Circuit Tosses $368 Million Patent Verdict Against Apple’s FaceTime, Okays Nix on Citing Reexam
Measuring patent damages — and excluding reexam evidence
The Federal Circuit again tightened the criteria for setting damages awards in patent infringement cases. But, in a bit of good news for infringement plaintiffs, it lent further support to the general inclination of district courts to exclude evidence of non-final results of patent reexaminations by the U.S. Patent
Don’t Weep for Apple . . . or Blame the DOJ
Apple settles
Apple has settled up to $841 million of antitrust claims by state attorneys-general and a nationwide class of consumers who bought e-books from Apple and its publisher co-conspirators.
The pact comes almost a year after U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in New York held Apple civilly liable for conspiracy to fix prices, a
Damages Experts Get Apple v. Motorola (Google) Reprieve
Boy, the Federal Circuit's sure lowered the boom on Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner in Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., No. 12-1548 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 25, 2014).
Smartphone warfare.
The appeal dealt with Judge Posner's rulings as a trial court judge in the Northern District of Illinois phase of the titanic smartphone struggle between Apple and Motorola
Apple Fixed E-Book Prices, Trial Judge Rules
Did Apple collude with publishers to jack up the price of e-books?
You betcha, U.S. District Judge Denise L. Cote ruled in Manhattan today after a three-week trial.
A damages trial will follow.
Apple pursued a nutty defense, which held that it and the publishers did no wrong
Did Apple v. Samsung Jury Go Too Far?
A law prof at a small school in the Golden State opined that the jury in Apple v. Samsung went Way Too Far when on August 24 it awarded Apple almost $1.05 billion after finding that Samsung copied — very much on purpose — Apple's smartphone designs.
His analysis? That an "average smartphone may arguably
E-Books Case Draws WSJ Wrath
Talk about goofy.
Today's WSJ — The Wall Street Journal — includes a column that gets antitrust law so wrong you wonder why the paper's pundits, who include those who write the official editorials, bother.
The column in question takes aim at the U.S. Department of Justice's case that calls Apple and five book publishers
U.S. E-Book Complaint Lays Out “Agency” Pact with Apple
You've likely heard by now that the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice sued Apple and a bunch of e-book publishers for fixing prices on, well, e-books.
You can see the complaint here.
The key part comes in paragraph 7, which explains Apple's "agency" plan for thwarting Amazon's effort to cut all