“Do Not Track” – Recent Developments in Internet Privacy

Fresh off successful efforts to quash the Stop Online Piracy Act, a number of internet companies are turning to consumer privacy issues. Web giants like Google and Facebook have been facing mounting political pressure and popular demands for greater user choice and control over privacy settings. In the forefront of the debate is the proposed Do Not Track mechanism to restrict the tracking of user data. In the hands of web service providers and advertisers, information relating to consumers’ online activities –  such as browsing history, search terms and geographical location –  are pieced together to form a digital fingerprint of interests and preferences. This knowledge enables the delivery of personalized content and targeted behavioural advertising. The industry fears that strict privacy measures could negatively impact advertising revenue, a substantial component of corporate growth. Read the rest of this entry »

Google’s New Privacy Policy: Going Too Far?

Anyone who uses one of Google’s multitudes of services recently has been confronted with Google’s new Privacy Policy, which was implemented on the 1^st of March. Internet privacy is obviously a major concern for users and governments alike, and this new policy has been met with mixed reaction. Canadian reaction has suggested that it is a step in the right direction, whereas American lawmakers have asked for changes, and this week the European Union has suggested that the changes are in breach of European law. The multiplicity of reaction means it is important to understand what the changes are and why so many have come to their unique positions about it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Apple v Samsung: This Time It’s Global

“The United States district court is a public institution, and the workings of litigation must be open to public view,” Justice Alsup wrote in an October order in Oracle America, Inc v. Google Inc. Yet this is not the approach of U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh and U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal, who have not only granted many of Apple and Samsung’s sealing motions, but in some cases have gone even further. During an October hearing on the proposed injunction, Koh was unprompted when she asked Apple and Samsung if they wanted to seal the courtroom.

This level of secrecy prevents academics, lawyers, and other curious bystanders from the cottage industry of prognosticating the results of the trial. Perhaps the best alternative is to look at the recent decision by the German courts applying EU law in an effort to draw some conclusions that could apply to the American ruling. Read the rest of this entry »

Apple Manages to Frustrates Developers…Again!

Apple has launched a new requirement, which will require sandboxing of all Mac App Store applications, starting next March. This move again will frustrate developers, although Apple claims its main motivation for such a move is to provide safety. Apple has had a unique relationship with many app developers in the past, providing a superb launch point and audience for their products, but also frustrating them with restrictive and sometimes anti-competitive strategies. Read the rest of this entry »

Microsoft Defends Patent-Licensing Strategy

Amidst the flurry of patent cases among the lot of mobile technology companies, it is difficult to keep track of who is bringing whom to court. In light of the sheer number of cases and their ever growing international scope, even the use of flow charts cannot fully rescue our collectively boggled minds from the convoluted and fast evolving relationships of these entities. On this basis alone, many would say that without a serious overhaul, the patent system risks completely stymieing its objective of fostering innovation – at least in the mobile business where companies appear more preoccupied by legal disputes than research and development.

According to Microsoft Deputy General Counsel Horacio Gutiérrez, however, such legal wrangling is an expected consequence following the introduction of any new and disruptive technology. Read the rest of this entry »

Samsung Breathes Temporary Sigh of Relief in U.S. Patent Battle with Apple

In the latest development in the legal saga between Apple and Samsung, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh tentatively declined to issue a preliminary injunction that would bar some Samsung smartphones and tablets from U.S. sale. In July, Apple had requested the injunction from the Northern District Californian federal court on the basis that Samsung’s Galaxy line of products copies the iPhone and iPad in functions and appearance. Read the rest of this entry »

Google-Motorola Deal: the Patent Portfolio Factor

So we’ve all heard how Google recently bought Motorola for a hefty $12.5 billion on Monday. Aside from the synergies Google gains from end-to-end control, as Google now has hardware, software and service arms to create their mobile products, perhaps just as importantly, Google has also purchased one of the largest patent portfolios of its kind in the mobile industry. Read the rest of this entry »

Do the copycat Apple stores in China harm Apple?

News of fake Apple stores in China sparked a media frenzy last month, with calls of massive intellectual property infringement. Of the five fake stores in Kunming, two were shut down, but for lacking official business licenses, not for who they were pretending to be. More interestingly, according to reports, the Apple products sold at these stores were the real deal. That these stores were and are selling real Apple products complicates the question of whether there are legal claims to be had for copyright infringement. Read the rest of this entry »

Beyond Refusal to Deal: A Cross-Atlantic View of Copyright, Competition and Innovation Policies

Paul-Erik Veel and Professor Ariel Katz have recently released a paper comparing the Competition Law in the European Union and the United States. The abstract:

Conventional wisdom holds that the European Union, through the application of its competition law, has opted to subordinate intellectual property rights in the pursuit of competitive markets to a much greater extent than has the United States. We argue that, at least in the context of copyright protection, this conventional wisdom is false. Read the rest of this entry »

Patent Troll on Steroids: How America’s Patent System May Hurt Innovation

This American Life (TAL) is running a story this week that is well worth tuning in for. Some may have heard of Nathan Myhrvold during his time as IBM’s chief strategist and chief of technology or from his $600, six-volume cookbook. But few outside IT circles would know of his “innovative invention company” Intellectual Ventures, and how it is regarded by many in the field as the leader of patent trolls, having amassed roughly 35,000 patents since its inception in 2000. Read the rest of this entry »