Samsung's Arbitration Appeal Rejected By Supreme Court
Samsung cannot force customers who've filed class-action lawsuits into arbitration, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court refused to hear an appeal by Samsung that hoped to push customers into arbitration, leaving the decision of a lower court intact. The case goes back to 2014 when owners of the Galaxy SIII and S4 smartphones attempted to file class-action lawsuits against Samsung over the devices' performance. The two customers claim they were never made aware of the arbitration provisions in the customer agreement at the time of purchase, which specifically prohibits class-action lawsuits. In January a three-judge panel agreed with the consumers, saying neither actually agreed to the arbitration provision, which was buried in the owner's manual. Companies often attempt to force arbitration to prevent lawsuits because it leaves them less open to the risk of trials and heavy damages. The behavior is anti-consumer, however, and courts and other agencies have taken a closer look at arbitration clauses in recent years. Today's news is a victory for consumers.
AT&T Sidesteps Class-Action Suit Over Throttling
A federal judge sided with AT&T and said consumers suing the carrier over its throttling practices cannot work together as a group. Instead, customers must pursue individual arbitration with the carrier, per their signed user agreements.
Samsung to Take Apple Patent Case to Supreme Court
Samsung wants the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal regarding on-going patent litigation with Apple.
Supreme Court to Hear Apple v. Samsung Patent Case
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear Samsung's petition regarding its patent-based litigation with Apple.
Supreme Court Refusal Means Samsung Owes Apple $120M
The U.S. Supreme Court today said it will not review an appeal made by Samsung to overturn a $120 million fine owed to Apple for violating the latter's patented technology.
LG Agrees to Pay Nokia Royalties, But Rates Not Settled
LG has signed a patent-licensing agreement with Nokia over smartphone technology, but the companies have yet to agree on pricing for the patents. Nokia may have sold its handset business to Microsoft, but it retained many of the related patents for licensing purposes.
How about some consistency?
Who reads that stuff, especially after you bought the phone and would be subject to a restocking fee?