Cicso Systems vs Huawei Technologies I. Cisco Systems files lawsuit against Huawei Technologies Cisco Systems filed a lawsuit against Huawei Technologies on January 23, 2003 claiming that Huawei had copied, misappropriated, and infringed on Cisco’s intellectual property in its rival line of low-cost networking routers.1 Cisco Systems is an industry leader in providing networking equipment for voice and data transfer. Huawei Technologies is China’s leading manufacturer of telecom and network equipment gear and is viewed by analysts as a formidable competitor to Cisco2. II. Details of the lawsuit Cisco’s allegations include the following:3 . Copying of IOS source code: IOS (Internetworking Operating System) is Cisco’s proprietary operating system.
On March 31, a $1 billion trial between Apple and Samsung began in California court. Apple was accusing Samsung of infringing on software patents related to its iPhone. These two companies used to get along great. Their legal battle started long after Samsung started selling Android devices. Apple founder Steve Jobs hated Android and once called it a “stolen” product — a ripoff of the iPhone.
13 May, 2009 - European Union fines Intel Corporation a record €1.06bn fine for violating Competition Law. EU Antitrust Commission imposes fine for violating European Community Treaty antitrust rules by an abuse of dominant position through illegal practices, excluding competitors from a market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (CPUs) (1). Intel Corp. refused playing guilty and asked judges to overturn the antitrust fine, arguing that EU failed to use mitigating evidence and “capture dynamics of competition”, according to Nicholas Green, lawyer of Intel. The purpose of this research is to identify and discuss the basis for the concerns and intervention of the regulator, in this case – European Union Antitrust Commission. Furthermore, the nature and effectiveness of the fines imposed will be evaluated.
In addition, these abductions were committed by the Argentine armed forces against several of the accused members of the company. On the other hand, the military claimed that those were reported by the direction of the entity Rafael Videla regime as being "subversive elements." Finally in 2011, a federal court in San Francisco admitted the complaint arguing that the connection between sales of cars manufactured by the German company in California evidenced a link between the U.S. and the events during the Dirty War in Argentina, sufficient for the U.S. courts could judge. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the possibility that a California court consider the plot of the subsidiary of the German company Daimler in Argentina in the torture, murder and disappearances committed during the military dictatorship that took place in that country between 1976 and 1982. The resolution, adopted unanimously endorse... ... middle of paper ... ...st 12 Nigerians who filed a lawsuit in the U.S. against the Dutch oil company Shell for complicity in torture and murder committed by the Government of Nigeria between 1992 and 1995.
This case will be discussed in the following sections to understand the underlying factors in the domain of Information Security Management. 1. Background/Understanding the DigiNotar incident It was detected on 29th August 2011 that DigiNotar issued a fraudulent security certificate for Google.com due to a security breach. This resulted in a more detailed examination performed by the security consultancy named Fox-IT, revealing that DigiNotar was expected to have been hacked on around 6th June, which was almost a month before the hackers had started publishing the fraudulent certificates. The hackers reportedly accessed the compromised systems in order to issue the SSL(Secure Sockets Layer) certificates for a number of domains including Google, Skype, Microsoft etc.
The Twitter account had been the hacker’s target from the beginning. In a separate case of cybercrime, on July 29th 2011, the hacktivist group Anonymous breached the network of the defense contractor ManTech and stole information from their servers. ManTech provides network security services for the FBI for 99.5 million dollars over a five year contract. The breach was announced by Anonymous via Twitter, and was stated to be in retaliation for the arrest of some of its members, nine days earlier for their participation in a denial of service attack against PayPal (Fahmida Rashid. 2011).
proceeding against Samsung, declarative twenty one additional devices discharged since August 2011 infringe on Apple patents, as well as the Galaxy S3 and Galaxy Note. Oct. – Nov. 2012: Galaxy Nexus ban raised An appellate court lifts associate degree injunction on U.S. sales of the Samsung-made Galaxy Nexus, that had been Apple’s strongest blow against a flagship automaton product. Dec. 2012: Apple’s patents known as into question iPad Pinch to ZoomThe U.S. Patent of Trademark workplace tentatively rejects all claims of Apple’s ‘915 “pinch-to-zoom” patent, one among the foremost valuable multi-touch patents in Apple’s case against Samsung. whereas a final ruling could also be years away, if the patent is nullified it might trigger a full trial of the primary U.S. Apple-Samsung conflict. Apple maintains the patent can hold up; Samsung says they need a workaround.
Cisco vs. Huawei: Intellectual Property Introduction On Jan. 23, 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. announced that it has filed a lawsuit against a Chinese equipment manufacturer, Huawei Technologies, Co., LTD and its subsidiaries, Huawei America, Inc. and FutureWei Technologies, Inc. over Huawei's unlawful copying of Cisco's intellectual property. Cisco is the worldwide leader in networking for the Internet with the headquarter located in US. Huawei, based in Shenzhen, China, is China's biggest telecommunications equipment maker, has a wide reach in Asia, and recently entered the U.S. market, challenging Cisco on the pricing front. Because the lawsuit happens between two representative companies of telecom industry in US and China respectively, so it attracts many attentions in IT industry from the beginning of Cisco's announcement. Details of the lawsuit Cisco's suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleges that Huawei unlawfully copied and misappropriated Cisco's IOS.
German courts The following is a case investigation of lawsuits between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics regarding the design of smartphones and tablet computers between them according to German courts. In July 2011, Apple sued Samsung for patent infringement, namely through items including the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. Apple claims that Samsung infringed its patents in the Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets, arguing that Samsung copied the design and esthetics of Apple's ios range of devices. Samsung then counter-sued in excess of 3g patents, which are possessed by the firm. Also, stating that Apple infringed patents relating to wireless networking.