Plaintiff | Cell Phone Tracking Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Plaintiff’

iPhone user who sued AT&T receives new settlement offer

Tuesday, March 13th, 2012

A judge in Southern California last month awarded $850 to an iPhone user who was throttled on AT&T’s network. The plaintiff, Matt Spaccarelli, filed a small claims case against AT&T, arguing that the carrier unfairly slowed speeds on his iPhone 4 despite his unlimited data plan. According to a report from the Associated Press, AT&T is offering Spaccarelli a new settlement, however the company declined to comment on the matter. If Spaccarelli does not want to sit down with the carrier, it will reportedly look into shutting off his service. Earlier this month AT&T amended its data throttling policy for unlimited users, stating that LTE phones will be slowed after a 5GB monthly allowance, while non-LTE devices will be limited to 3GB of full-speed data.

Read

 Mail this post

Lawsuits filed against HTC, Samsung and Carrier IQ

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

Class action lawsuits have been filed against Samsung, HTC and Carrier IQ. Carrier IQ has been in the spotlight after a security expert revealed that its software is installed on millions of smartphones and may be spying on users. Sprint and AT&T have both admitted to using the application, and other carriers likely use similar services, but both carriers have denied taking advantage of the software’s ability to spy on customers. The class action lawsuits are seeking hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of all U.S. residents, paidContent said Friday. Read on for more.

HTC, Samsung and Carrier IQ have been accused of violating the Federal Wiretap Act which “protects
 the
 privacy
 of
 wire,
 oral,
 and
 electronic
 communications” of all Americans. A St. Louis lawsuit against HTC states the following:

Plaintiff, Erin Janek owns an HTC Android phone using the Sprint network. At all relevant times Plaintiff used her phone to electronically send over her cell phone network various types of private data. This data was not readily accessible to the general public. She did not know that Defendants were surreptitiously monitoring and collecting this data, nor did she give them permission to do so.

HTC said in a recent statement that it is “not a customer or partner of Carrier IQ and does not receive data from the application, the company, or carriers that partner with Carrier IQ” but that a number of U.S. wireless carriers use the service. Carrier IQ has denied that it provides tracking tools and says its “software is designed to help mobile network providers diagnose critical issues that lead to problems such as dropped calls and battery drain.”

On Thursday, Senator Al Franken sent a formal letter to Carrier IQ forcing the company to answer 11 questions regarding its practices. Senator Franken gave Carrier IQ until December 14th to respond.

Read

 Mail this post

Judge shoots down Personal Audio’s second Apple infringement case

Sunday, July 31st, 2011

Talk about swift justice. It’s been less than a week since we reported on Personal Audio’s second infringement suit against Apple, and an East Texas judge has already put an end to the litigation. In a statement regarding the company’s complaint that the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and latest generation iPods infringed on the same patents put forth in its initial suit, Judge Ron Clark said the $8 million already awarded to the plaintiff should do just fine. He went on to deny the company’s request for a second trial. It may not be the last we hear of Personal Audio, but it is a refreshing change of pace from the usual goings on in Eastern District courtrooms.

Judge shoots down Personal Audio’s second Apple infringement case originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 31 Jul 2011 03:57:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Electronista  |  sourceScribd  | Email this | Comments

 Mail this post

Class action suit against RIM refiled

Wednesday, June 15th, 2011

An investigation launched last month by a law firm into whether or not Research In Motion had violated securities laws resulted in the filing of a class action lawsuit late last month. After the lead plaintiff in the suit voluntarily withdrew her complaint on May 31st, however, it was unclear if the suit would be refiled. This week, Atlanta-based law firm Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC indeed refiled its class action suit with a new lead plaintiff, Gerald Chatlin. The news comes just before RIM is scheduled to report earnings on Thursday for the first quarter of its 2012 fiscal year.

Read

 Mail this post

Apple takes Lodsys patent fight to court

Friday, June 10th, 2011

A few weeks back, a patent-holding company called Lodsys began contacting developers and asking them to cough up money for using their in-app purchasing technology without a license. Apple intervened briefly and said that its developers are covered under its own license, but now the company has taken the matter to court with an official movement to intervene. The motion officially states:

Apple Inc. hereby respectfully moves to intervene as a defendant and counterclaim plaintiff in the above-captioned action brought by plaintiff Lodsys, LLC against seven software application developers for allegedly infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 7,222,078 and 7,620,565. Apple seeks to intervene because it is expressly licensed to provide to the Developers products and services that embody the patents in suit, free from claims of infringement of those patents.

Hit the jump for more of the back story.

Apple’s move is in addition to a separate suit from ForSee Results, which filed a declaratory lawsuit against Lodsys on June 10th. Lodsys has remained inexorable in its belief that developers are in debt. “We stand firm and restate our previous position that it is the 3rd party Developers that are responsible for the infringement of Lodsys’ patents and they are responsible for securing the rights for their applications,” Lodsys said in a recent statement. Lodsys has also targeted Android developers, but we have yet to hear what Google’s role in this battle will be.

Read

 Mail this post

Hurt Locker lawsuit targets a record-breaking 24,583 IP addresses

Friday, May 27th, 2011
It’s been almost a year since the producers of The Hurt Locker filed a lawsuit against 5,000 alleged pirates suspected of distributing the film via BitTorrent. Now Voltage Pictures has updated its complaint, adding almost 20,000 IP addresses to the list of defendants. That makes it the largest file-sharing lawsuit of all time – a crown previously held by the company behind The Expendables, according to Wired. The plaintiff has already reached agreements with Charter and Verizon to identify individual users, but no such deal with Comcast, who owns nearly half the supposedly infringing addresses. Linking those addresses with user accounts would let Voltage manage individual settlements — probably somewhere between $1,000-$2,000 — rather than continue legal action. All of this eerily echoes the Oscar-winning film’s plot, about an adrenaline junkie who couldn’t resist downloading just one more movie. Or defusing one more bomb. We’re a little fuzzy on the details, but venture into TorrentFreak to scan for familiar IP addresses.

Hurt Locker lawsuit targets a record-breaking 24,583 IP addresses originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 27 May 2011 15:11:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  sourceTorrentFreak, Wired  | Email this | Comments

 Mail this post

XP downgrade lawsuit thrown out, MS lawyers celebrate rare victory

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

XP downgrade lawsuit thrown out, MS lawyers celebrate rare victoryIt’s hard to imagine a more busy team of lawyers than those on-staff at Microsoft, and while the news isn’t always good for them, today they can hold their heads high as a lawsuit filed last year alleging that MS was profiting from so-called “downgrade fees” has finally been dismissed. US District Court Judge Marsha Pechman found that the plaintiff, Emma Alvarado, didn’t prove Microsoft was in any way gaining value from these charges. In fact the downgrade fee to move to XP was, in this case, being charged by Lenovo, not Microsoft, and was to cover the additional time it took to physically install that OS over the standard (at the time) Vista. In other words Alvarado missed the mark and in the process surely cost taxpayers and Microsoft thousands and thousands of dollars. Hooray!

XP downgrade lawsuit thrown out, MS lawyers celebrate rare victory originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:51:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink ars technica  |  sourceComputerWorld  | Email this | Comments

 Mail this post

Apple wins permanent injunction against Psystar

Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

psystar2

It is the end of the line for Psystar as U.S. District Judge William Alsup has issued a permanent injunction against the Apple clone maker. The injunction prevents Psystar from pursuing its core hardware business by banning the following:

  • Copying, selling, offering to sell, distributing, or creating derivative works of plaintiff’s copyrighted Mac OS X software without authorization from the copyright holder
  • Intentionally inducing, aiding, assisting, abetting, or encouraging any other person or entity to infringe plaintiff’s copyrighted Mac OS X software;
  • Circumventing any technological measure that effectively controls access to plaintiff’s copyrighted Mac OS X software, including, but not limited to, the technological measure used by Apple to prevent unauthorized copying of Mac OS X on non-Apple computers
  • Manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to plaintiff’s copyrighted Mac OS X software, including, but not limited to, the technological measure used by Apple to prevent unauthorized copying of Mac OS X on non-Apple computer
  • Manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively protects the rights held by plaintiff under the Copyright Act with respect to its copyrighted Mac OS X software.

Psystar has until December 31th, 2009 to fully comply with the ruling and must begin the process immediately using a method that provides the fastest route to compliance. Psystar may have to shutter the hardware portion of its business but the legal status of Psystar’s $50 Rebel EFI software remains unclear. In his ruling, Alsup does not cite the Rebel EFI software specifically, claiming that Psystar failed to disclose exactly what the application did. In case Psystar has high hopes of continuing to sell its Rebel EFI software, Alsup issued a  stern warning, ‘What is certain, however, is that until such a motion is brought, Psystar will be selling Rebel EFI at its peril, and risks finding itself in contempt if its new venture falls within the scope of the injunction.” Will this admonishment permanently close the doors on Psystar or will the rebel company stage one last battle?

Read

 Mail this post