Apple sued for patent infringement over iPhone X camera and Do Not Disturb While Driving

Apple has been hit with not one, but two separate patent infringement suits. One is related to the dual camera setup on the back of several models including the Apple iPhone X. The second deals with Apple’s Do Not Disturb While Driving feature, which prevents texts, notifications and other messages from making it through to an iPhone when its owner is behind the wheel. We have the actual court filings from both suits which we’ve embedded below.

The patent infringement suit dealing with the iPhone X camera was filed in Northern California District Court against Apple, by Corephotonics. This …

Apple accused of stealing fingerprint technology, to be sued by a "patent troll"

Patent infringements are nothing unusual these days. Companies sue one another left and right claiming to be the original creators of a certain technology. On top of this, Apple often happens to be sued by so-called patent troll companies, and it seems like the Cupertino company is the suspect once again. Korean company Firstface claims to own the patent of a fingerprint scanner, built in the home button of the smartphone, a.k.a. Apple’s Touch ID.
Accusations of the supposed technology plagiarism came directly from Firstface co-CEO Jung Jae-lark. He said …

Apple is being sued over the Apple Watch's heart rate monitor

Apple is being sued by a Michigan-based start-up over the heart rate monitor featured in the Apple Watch. The company in question, called Omni MedSci, is largely focused on near-infrared lasers and claims Apple has willingly infringed on its patents with the heart rate technology included inside the Apple Watch, thus the reason it has now filed a lawsuit.

According to the start-up, Apple and Omni MedSci were originally in talks over a two-year period between 2014 and 2016, coinciding with the development process of the first-generation and Series 1 & 2 Apple Watch models. During the …

Google sued over issues with the microphone on the original Pixel and Pixel XL

When it rains, it pours. Earlier tonight, we told you about a lawsuit filed against Google’s Project Fi MVNO alleging that Google charges subscribers for data that is used over Wi-Fi.  Now comes word that the search giant is being sued over problems with the microphones on the original Pixel and Pixel XL units, which were launched in 2016. The suit, which has Class Action status, was filed by attorneys at Girard Gibbs LLP. This is the same firm trying to recruit Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL owners for a Class Action suit that would be filed against Google, LG and HTC. At issue are the multitude …

Apple sued for slowing down iPhones with older batteries

Apple is getting sued for “purposefully slowing down older iPhone models when new models come out”. A lawsuit was filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by Los Angeles residents Stefan Bogdanovich and Dakota Speas. 

The plaintiffs claim that Cupertino’s decision to implement power management features that can affect the performance of an iPhone presents a breach of contract, as Apple has failed to properly inform the user or obtain consent prior to making these changes. Here’s what the filing reads:

Defendant …

OnePlus could be sued for patent infringement over the 5T's Face Unlock feature

According to a report published by MySmartPrice, OnePlus is facing a possible patent infringement lawsuit that revolves around the Face Unlock facial recognition system on the OnePlus 5T. In our review of the phone, we mentioned how quickly the feature worked, even in the dark. One drawback is that the front-facing camera needs to be pointed directly at the user for Face Unlock to work. Any small deviation will prevent Face Unlock from opening the phone. Other than that, OnePlus generally has been receiving high marks for its biometric reader.

One person that might not be so happy with OnePlus …

Apple sued over false advertising on device memory

When you buy a 16 GB iPhone or iPad, you do not actually get 16 GB of available memory. Same goes for a 32 GB iOS mobile device or a 64 GB iOS device. Despite the memory capacity advertised on the device packaging or marketing materials, the increasing size of Apple’s iOS operating system means buyers have less and less memory left over after the OS is installed. This has led a couple of enterprising young class-action lawsuit entrepreneurs to sue Apple, Inc., alleging that a misrepresentation of available device memory constitutes “unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business acts or practices.”

On one hand, these two fellows totally have a point. Apple’s iOS is getting massive, cutting deeply into buyers’ available memory and burdening systems with a slew of pre-installed bloatware apps. In many cases, the available memory on an iOS device is more than 20 percent less than advertised.

On the other hand, when you see two guys from Florida filing a class-action lawsuit in California, it ought to set off some sort of “typical class-action lawsuit that has no merit” alarm bells.


And that’s the story of the lawsuit against Apple. The suit was filed in California on Dec. 29 by attorneys for Paul Orshan and Christopher Endara, two guys who bought 16 GB iPhones and found them to have only about 12.7 GB of that memory available.

“Reasonable consumers do not expect this marked discrepancy between the advertised level of capacity and the available capacity of the devices, as the operating system and other storage space unavailable to consumers occupies an extraordinary percentage of their devices’ limited storage capacity,” the plaintiffs state in their complaint.

The amount a user is “shorted” depends on the device. By the plaintiffs’ calculations, a 16 GB iPhone 6 only comes with 13 GB of space. A 16 GB iPhone 6 Plus comes with 12.7 GB of space, and a 16 GB iPad Air comes with 12.6 GB of space. (Again, these figures are merely the plaintiffs’ calculations. These are not verified totals, but they do sound about right.)

The plaintiffs also argue that Apple engages in an extortion scheme by charging users money for extra iCloud storage. The 99 cents per month for 20 GB does not sound like much “extortion.” But the $19.99 per month for an extra TB of storage can really add up.

“Using these sharp business tactics, defendant gives less storage capacity than advertised, only to offer to sell that capacity in a desperate moment, e.g., when a consumer is trying to record or take photos at a child or grandchild’s recital, basketball game or wedding,” the plaintiffs complain.

You can certainly argue that Android phones and tablets engage in the exact same scheme, and this is technically correct. But Android phones and tablets generally come with expandable storage via a microSD card. iPhones and iPads do not come with any expandable memory card capacities, and you never know how much of your available memory the next version of iOS is going to take up.

It should be noted that there is no guarantee this class-action lawsuit will move forward. The complaint has simply been filed, and the judge could take one look at it and toss it right out. Additionally, any monies won by the plaintiffs surely will not be shared with a larger population of iPhone users, or maybe a few users will get checks that amount to just pennies. That is the nature of class-action lawsuits.

But if these guys’ lawsuit results in more honest labeling of iPhone and iPad memory capacities, I would thank these guys for the memories.