Search for: "Apple Express" Results 61 - 80 of 3,123
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Apr 2023, 5:31 am by Paul Rosenzweig
In this article, I want to briefly explore the problem of nontransparent decision-making through the prism of Apple’s publicly expressed policy regarding content of apps in its App Store. [read post]
16 Aug 2016, 5:12 am by SHG
This month, Apple previewed some changes to its next generation of iPhones and iPads with the promise that “all the things you love to do are more expressive, more dynamic and more fun than ever. [read post]
2 May 2012, 9:30 pm by Abigail Slater
  All views expressed are the author’s own and do not represent the views of the FTC or any individual Commissioner. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 5:57 pm
Katz claims in the suit that upon hiring, he expressed interest in being promoted to a Creative, a higher position within the store, and applied for multiple job openings over the course of two years, but was denied every time. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 11:15 am by Patent Arcade Staff
This is rooted in the First Amendment and freedom of expression. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 6:09 pm
The unusual patent was created in response to consumers expressing an increased desire to protect their online identities from a deluge of information profilers. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 2:46 am by Stan
Tong said the company had developed a series of computer-related products under the trademark and accused Apple of making profits from its reputation in China.Tong told the Modern Express newspaper that Apple had applied for the Snow Leopard trademark in China in 2008 but had been rejected. [read post]
7 May 2013, 11:41 pm by Florian Mueller
This was just a quote from a decision by Judge Posner, who also expressed concern about cost implications. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 7:14 am by Timothy J. Maier
 Samsung responded by challenging the validity of the Apple patents and countersuing Apple for infringing on five of its own patents, asking for $519 million. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 8:20 am by Florian Mueller
This patent is now of very dubious validity to say the least.In my impact assessment of Apple's injunction motion I expressed doubts that Samsung could leverage the status of the '915 reexamination in the context of a permanent injunction, which -- unlike a preliminary one -- is based on a final (even if appealable) liability finding as opposed to an assessment of probabilities of different outcomes. [read post]
5 Jan 2016, 9:55 pm by Florian Mueller
Even though things that judges say at a hearing are not the same as an actual decision, the mere fact that the Federal Circuit has expressed massive doubts about those patents already validates my skepticism.A little less than two years ago, the trial in the second California Apple v. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 10:53 am by admin
According to the FTC, Apple will be required as part of the settlement to revise its billing practices to ensure that it has obtained express, informed consent from … read more » [read post]
16 Apr 2013, 9:33 pm by Florian Mueller
Samsung would like the California case stayed while these reexaminations are ongoing, but Apple yesterday filed its response and says that a stay would be "unwarranted and prejudicial".Apple expresses its confidence that "the claims will be confirmed" when all is said and done and argues that "if final adverse decisions were the ultimate result, they likely would not occur until mid-2017 or later". [read post]
15 Jun 2022, 11:22 pm by Cory Doctorow
When Apple’s customers express interest in using rival app stores, Apple goes to extraordinary technical and legal lengths to prevent them from doing so The iOS business model is based on selling hardware and collecting commissions on apps. [read post]