A Virginia man who wrote an abbreviated version of the Fourth Amendment on his body and stripped to his shorts at an airport security screening area won a trial Friday in his lawsuit seeking $250,000 in damages for being detained on a disorderly conduct charge.
[via Threat Level]
…hooray for America?
Samsung owes Apple more than $1 billion in damages for violating Apple hardware and software patents, a California jury ruled on Friday.
The jury found that Samsung infringed upon Apple patents having to do with physical design and user interfaces, often willfully, and that several of the South Korean company’s products diluted Apple’s trade dress, especially as it related to various iPhone models.
More @ Gadget Lab.
The producers of a viral phenomenon urging the capture of a Ugandan warlord want you to know they will not be mocked.
After the activist group Invisible Children created the Kony 2012 campaign to arrest Joseph Kony, a group of New York University graduate students created Kickstriker, a parody of a Kickstarter page aping Invisible Children’s style. They wanted to take Invisible Children’s earnestness to the point of absurdity, through a (fake) appeal to crowdsource the financing of mercenaries to hunt Kony down. They critiqued what one of them described to Danger Room as a “new activism that puts the reader, the donor, the viewer at the center of the story.”
Invisible Children doesn’t think Kickstriker is funny. In fact, they’ve sent the Kickstriker team a cease-and-desist warning to take down the parody page.
….Oh Kony 2012.
Google outlined its defense Tuesday in its high-profile legal battle with Oracle over Android’s use of the Java programming language.
Presenting Google’s opening arguments on day two of the trial, Lead Counsel Robert Van Nest argued that Google was free to write its own version of the Java virtual machine…
On Tuesday, Google’s Van Nest said he hoped to prove that there is no copyright infringement because the language is free, that Sun was aware from day one of what Google was doing, and, finally, that Android is a fair use of the Java APIs. “Google didn’t need a license to use Java in Android,” he argued. “The actual source code was written from scratch by Google engineers or taken from other open source platforms.”
The battle continues. Read more.