Sentences with phrase «decision against apple»

Now the decision against Apple is out, and the news isn't at all good for the iPhone maker.

Not exact matches

The Late Show host also spoke to Cook about his decision last year to publicly announce that he is gay, as well as the Apple CEO's efforts to increase the company's charitable works: «It became so clear to me that kids were getting bullied in school, kids were getting discriminated against, kids were even being [disowned] by their own parents,» Cook said.

The iPhone maker has decided against pursuing the development of an Elvis Presley biopic series in light of allegations last week of The Weinstein Company's co-founder Harvey Weinstein sexually harassing women over decades, Deadline is reporting, citing people who claim to have knowledge of Apple's decision.

The European Union's competition authorities announced a major tax ruling against Apple's tax dealings with the Irish government on Tuesday, a decision that will likely increase trans - Atlantic tension over how some of the world's largest companies pay taxes on their global operations.

Toyota seems to be one of the last manufacturers to hold out against adding Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, a decision that is putting it behind rivals.

While consumers and industry watchers alike have spent a fair amount of time waiting eagerly to see how the ruling handed down against Apple for anti-trust violations would actually impact the publishing industry, the tech company has made a statement of its own asserting that the decision by Judge Denise Cote in the case brought against them by the Department of Justice is overly punitive and harsh.

While he was unsuccessful, Kohn's motion in no way impacted the decision or proceedings against Apple for its part in this issue; Apple is appealing its own ruling, handed down by Cote earlier this year in which she found sufficient evidence of price fixing on the part of the company.

«You had months to think about whether you wanted my pre-trial views or not,» she told Snyder, and stressed she hasn't made a final decision yet: «My view was a tentative view... The deck is not stacked against Apple unless the evidence stacks the deck against Apple.»

Steve Berman, a partner at Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro pursuing consumer class - action litigation against Apple, called Cote's decision «a very big deal.»

Apple recently had a $ 533 million decision against them thrown out in the suit brought by Shockwave LLC.

As I explained in a previous post, «the decision on Apple's claims was very specific not only to the four patents at issue at that stage of the litigation but also to the course of events in that litigation (as I pointed out in my detailed analysis)», as evidenced by the fact that Apple has meanwhile won two preliminary injunctions against Samsung, while «Judge Posner's position on FRAND is universally - applicable, and it will be extremely influential, throughout and beyond the United States», to Google's (Motorola's) dismay.

The fact that Google - Motorola argues against the significance of Judge Posner's ruling, implicitly announcing an appeal and belittling it as a «non-binding district court decision» (Judge Posner, a circuit judge who usually only hears apeals, was sitting «by designation» on a district court for that particular case), shows that some people made a mistake (or purposely wanted to mislead) by portraying the ruling as a defeat only, or mostly, for Apple.

This week's ITC decisions involving various of Apple's and Microsoft's patent infringement claims against Android were important, but every time the ITC rules on one of those smartphone patent cases, I am less surprised than before about the high drop - out rate of patent claims.

Previous ITC decisions either cleared Android devices of violation of the asserted patents (Apple's three - patent complaint against Motorola) or identified a violation with respect to only one or two patents at a time.

Whatever the scope of Apple's appeal against the ITC may be, I believe Apple has realistic chances of winning a better outcome, but this will take time before the CAFC hands down its decision on this appeal.

A Texas jury decision to award damages of $ 533 million against Apple for infringing three patents owned by NPE Smartflash Technologies has rightly attracted a lot of headlines.

Emonster consequently filed a suit against Apple in October stating that «Apple made the conscious decision to try to pilfer the name («Animoji») for itself.»

When Apple decided to get rid of the headphone jack, the audio nerds were up in arms against the decision.

Apple has insisted that the judge presiding over its patent trial against Samsung should punish the Galaxy phone maker for its decision to leak to the public evidence excluded from the proceedings.

If this is indeed the Huawei Mate 10, the Chinese company will certainly have a difficult job to compete against not only Apple, but also Samsung, as not going for a bezel-less design this year could prove to be a decision that makes customers to look elsewhere for new phones.

That being said, the decision does set a precedent, and could factor into future lawsuits Apple may decide to bring against rival smartphone makers.

It's the classic battle between two different schools of thought: the closed - in iOS, where Apple knows best and makes all the decisions, against and Android system that gives users all the choice they could ever need, and then some.

That decision inspired the bitcoin community to erupt in a somewhat violent display of solidarity against the company's products, and led to accusations that Apple had abandoned its principles by turning its back on innovation.

Apple's decision to slow down older iPhones, which was implemented in a software update in a version of iOS 10 in 2016, has led to lawsuits against the company, as well as government agency probes from all across the globe.