Law and Innovation

Fresh and interesting article posted in the fashion section of the New York Times about how stylish tech bracelet, iWatch (Apple), and smartwatches will (very soon?) sink Switzerland and Swiss watchmakers. Happy reading! "It’s time we stopped calling the current crop of gadgets “wearable tech.” Instead, I propose we start giving them a more appropriate name: “ugly tech.” Because let’s be realistic, most wearables today are really, really ugly. Take the Pebble , a smart watch with a black-and-white screen, which first had its debut on Kickstarter in 2012. While geeks love the watch for its ability to show text messages and emails, the device itself looks like a small Kindle strapped to your wrist. Smartwatches made by LG, Samsung and Sony aren’t much better, with cheesy faux leather or rubber straps, and thick masculine watch faces that look as if they’re supposed to be paired with a pocket protector. The Neptune Pine watch is so large, with its 2.4-inch ...

‘Inadvertent disclosures’ happened (Samsung’s counsel [1] ). Inadvertent (Adj.): failing to act carefully or considerately; inattentive (Collins Online Dictionary). A couple of days ago, F. Mueller IP expert (FOSS patent) published an interesting article about Samsung’s illegal disclosure of confidential information related to the secret Nokia-Apple patent license. In this case, the United States District Court (Northern District of California) seemed to be very ‘angry’ with Samsung and its outside counsel (Quinn Emanuel). From the start, the tone was set: ‘(…) Letting Samsung and its counsel investigate without any court supervision is unlikely to produce satisfactory results’ said Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal. What are the consequences of such a disclosure and what sanctions on Samsung’s actions might be taken by the Court? Unfortunately, it’s still hard to predict... The mere facts of this new  Apple Inc. (and Nokia) vs. Samsung Electronics Co . case...

Google Invokes First Amendment In The NSA PRISM Scandal  I t will not surprised me that Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo's Offices are under monitoring surveillance right now. Revelations about the PRISM program are not only revealing crispy details on National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance methods, opening new debates about national security vs. personal privacy, but are also provoking fissures between U.S. Officials and all the technology companies involved in it; mostly Google. Yesterday, Google filed a " motion for declaratory judgement [1] of Google Inc.'s first amendment right to publish aggregate information about FISA Orders " (click here ). As you all know, the First Amendment states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press (underlined added) ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition...