Pennsylvania-based law firm Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP on Friday filed a class action lawsuit against Facebook regarding the handling of its initial public offering, which was made on March 18th. On the day of its IPO, the company was hit with a privacy-related class action lawsuit seeking $15 billion in damages. This new complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, charges Facebook and multiple officers, directors and underwriters with violating the Securities Act of 1933 by failing to disclose or disregarding material adverse facts that were known to them.

“The Complaint asserts that defendants failed to disclose at the time of the IPO that Facebook was then experiencing a severe and pronounced reduction in revenue growth due to an increase in users of its Facebook mobile applications (“apps”) or website through mobile devices rather than through personal computers,” the firm said in a release.

The firm continued, “Additionally, defendants failed to disclose during the roadshow conducted in connection with the IPO, certain Underwriter Defendants reduced their second quarter and full year 2012 performance estimates for Facebook, which revisions were material information which was not shared with all Facebook investors, but rather, was selectively disclosed by defendants to certain preferred investors and omitted from the Offering Materials.”

Investors who purchased Facebook stock can join the class on the firm’s website if they wish to participate in the suit, which is still seeking a lead plaintiff.

CBS, Fox and NBC have independently filed lawsuits against Dish Network, claiming its new automatic commercial-deleting service Auto Hop violates copyright laws; Fox even goes as far as to state that Auto Hop is “destroying the fundamental underpinnings of the broadcast television ecosystem.” Auto Hop is a feature launched recently for Dish Network’s Hopper DVR. When enabled, the free add-on allows users to automatically skip over commercials aired during prime time shows on each of the four major television broadcast networks — ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC. Networks took issue with the feature immediately, of course, and now complaints have been filed by three of the four affected networks, BGR sister site Deadline reports. Dish has already filed its own complaint with a New York district court seeking a declaratory judgement that its new service is “in full compliance with copyright law and its re-broadcast agreements.”

Read

Facebook is officially a public company as of Friday morning shortly after 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time, and what better way to celebrate the milestone than with a fresh privacy lawsuit? Led by Stewarts Law and Bartimus, Frickleton, Robertson & Gorny, a class action lawsuit has been filed in San Jose, California alleging that Facebook unlawfully continued to track users’ Web browsing after they logged out of the service. The suit seeks more than $15 billion in damages. “This is not just a damages action, but a groundbreaking digital privacy rights case that could have wide and significant legal and business implications,” said Stewarts Law partner David Straite. The firm’s press release follows below.

Stewarts Law acts for facebook users who have filed a Consolidated Digital Privacy Class Action

18 May 2012 (San Jose, Calif.)

Facebook users today filed an amended consolidated class action complaint in federal court in San Jose, California in the case In re: Facebook Internet Tracking Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD. The class action asserts federal statutory and California State causes of action related to the revelation in September 2011 that Facebook was improperly tracking the internet use of its members even after they logged out of their accounts. The action consolidates 21 related cases filed in more than a dozen states in 2011 and early 2012.

The plaintiffs assert claims under the federal Wiretap Act, which provides statutory damages per user of US$100 per day per violation, up to a maximum per user of US$10,000. Even if Facebook’s alleged actions constitute a single violation of the Wiretap Act per class member, that implies more than US$15 billion in damages across the class. The complaint also asserts claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Stored Communications Act, various California Statutes and California common law.

The class action is being led by court-appointed co-lead counsel Stewarts Law US LLP and Bartimus, Frickleton, Robertson & Gorny, P.C. David Straite, Partner at Stewarts Law, stated: “This is not just a damages action, but a groundbreaking digital privacy rights case that could have wide and significant legal and business implications.” In addition to co-lead counsel, the court has appointed a Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee which includes Keefe Bartels in New Jersey; Mandell, Schwartz & Boisclair in Rhode Island; Eichen Crutchlow Zaslow & McElroy in New Jersey; Bergmanis Law Firm in Missouri; Burns, Cunningham & Mackey in Alabama; and Murphy, Falcon & Murphy in Baltimore. The court has also appointed a committee of former State Attorneys General to advise the class, including former Mississippi AG Mike Moore, former Arizona AG Grant Woods, former Hawaii AG Margery Bronster, and former Louisiana AG Richard Ieyoub.

[Via Investor's Business Daily]

Apple on May 1st filed a motion in the Northern District of California alleging that Samsung intentionally destroyed documents it was ordered to hand over to the Cupertino-based company, Network World reported on Friday. Apple referred to Samsung’s actions as a “spoilation of evidence” and wants the Judge to inform the jury that the South Korean vendor acted in bad faith in failing to meet its legal duty. If the jury finds Samsung liable for infringement, they may presume that the infringement was “intentional, willful, without regard to Apple’s rights,” and the documents in question would have been advantageous to Apple’s position. The iPhone-maker said Samsung’s actions “vast quantities of relevant evidence in blatant disregard of its duty to preserve all such evidence.” A hearing on Apple’s motion is scheduled for June 7th. Samsung’s reply brief is due by May 15th, however the smartphone vendor is seeking an extension to May 29th and would like to see the hearing pushed back to July 10th.

Read

Apple reportedly offered Proview $16 million to settle the companies’ ongoing legal dispute over the iPad name, but Proview rejected the offer, Chinese website Sina reported. The cash-strapped company is instead looking for $400 million dollars in an attempt to appease numerous creditors, eight of which are China-based banks. Proview originally threatened to sue Apple in United States for $2 billion, but a California judge tossed out the suit, instead encouraging the companies to reach a settlement. The two companies have been locked in a high-profile legal dispute over whether or not Apple has the right to use the iPad name. The Cupertino-based company maintains that it licensed the trademark from Proview in 2009, however the Chinese company claims the transaction in question is invalid.

[Via The Next Web]

Read

A California judge tossed out Proview’s trademark claims against Apple’s iPad tablet. The Chinese company filed a lawsuit in California’s superior court in February, claiming Apple’s license to use the iPad name was invalid, a claim Apple disputes. Judge Mark Pierce last week dismissed the case on the grounds that the two parties had previously agreed to settle any disagreements in Hong Kong, Reuters reported. Apple and Proview have been locked in a high-profile legal dispute over whether or not Apple has the right to use the use the iPad name in China and elsewhere. The iPad-maker maintains that it licensed the trademark from Proview in 2009.

Read

During Google’s ongoing legal dispute with Oracle, the judge presiding over the case revealed the Internet giant’s Android mobile operating system was not profitable in 2010, Reuters reported. Google does not publicly report financial information regarding its Android operating system, however the judge did not disclose specific figures, but instead said it lost money in each quarter of 2010. “That adds up to a big loss for the whole year,” he said. Oracle argued that Google should not be able to deduct certain Android expenses for the purposes of copyright damages related to the case.

Read

Adding insult to injury is never a concern for the litigious among us, and one man has filed a class action suit against Nokia in New York because its comeback, thus far, has been anything but. Complaint Robert Chmielinski, represented by Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, alleges that Nokia’s shift to the Windows Phone platform has not halted its sliding position in the global smartphone market, as the company promised it would. Nokia reported last month that it lost a staggering $1.7 billion in the first quarter of 2012 after losing nearly $1.3 billion in the fourth quarter last year. According to Chmielinski and the class he claims to represent, Nokia violated federal securities laws by telling investors that the switch to Windows Phone would stop the bleeding.

“The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants told investors that Nokia’s conversion to a Windows platform would halt its deteriorating position in the smartphone market. It did not,” the lawsuit states. “This became apparent on April 11, 2012, when Nokia disclosed that its first quarter performance would be worse than expected. Nokia expected its first quarter 2012 non-IFRS Devices & Services operating margin to fall by 3%, and projected first quarter 2012 Devices & Services net sales of €4.2 billion.”

“It also disclosed a glitch in its newest Windows offering – the Lumia 900. Nokia had to immediately offer customers an automatic $100, making the phone essentially free,” the complaint continued. ”As a result of this disclosure, the price of Nokia’s American Depositary Shares (‘ADRs’) dropped over 16% in a single day.”

Chmielinski and his layers seek unspecified damages for themselves as well as all individuals and institutions that owned publicly traded shares of Nokia stock during the class period. The complaint was filed with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on May 3rd.

Following the publication of this article, Nokia issued the following statement: “Nokia has become aware of the filing of a securities class action complaint naming Nokia Corporation as a defendant, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on May 3, 2012. Nokia is reviewing the allegations contained in the complaint and believes that they are without merit. Nokia will defend itself against the complaint.”

Updated with Nokia’s statement in final paragraph.

As Research In Motion continues to explore any and all options that might help carry it through the next two quarters until it finally launches its first BlackBerry 10 smartphone and beyond, one option reportedly on the table is patent trolling. RIM recently hired law firm Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP to explore a number of possible paths it might take in the near term and the long term as its struggles continue, and according to Techdirt, one of those options is to take a more aggressive stance with its patents. As the patent wars heat up in the mobile space, Microsoft seems to be the only major player pulling in substantial revenue from its recent publicized dealings involving aggressive patent plays. Even Apple, despite its numerous efforts, has yet to score any big wins of note. Whether or not RIM can manage to successfully weaponize its patent portfolio — if it is in fact exploring that option — remains to be seen, but the pressure is on as BlackBerry World 2012 kicks off with no new product announcements to be found following a brief preview of its next-generation smartphone platform.

Read

Google earlier this month reported its earnings for the first quarter of 2012, topping Wall Street’s estimates. The Internet giant also announced plans to create a new class of non-voting capital stock that would effectively create a 2-for-1 stock split. As a result, Google would be able to issue new shares of stock for acquisitions and employee compensation without diluting the 56.3% voting stake the company’s co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin control. Not everyone is happy about the planned split, however, and a shareholder has sued the company and its board in an attempt to block the plan. The class action lawsuit is being put forward by the Brockton Retirement Board, which has accused Google of breaching its fiduciary duty to the company’s shareholders, Reuters reported on Monday. The complaint states that Page and Brin “wish to retain this power, while selling off large amounts of their stockholdings, and reaping billions of dollars in proceeds.” The Brockton Retirement Board asked a Delaware judge to block the plan and award unspecified compensatory damages.

Read

Apple and Samsung’s CEOs are scheduled to meet on May 21st to discuss a possible settlement to the widely-publicized on-going legal battle, FOSS Patents reported. The two companies have been in a bitter patent war since last April that includes more than 20 cases in 10 countries. Despite the scheduled settlement talks, however, the Korean manufacturer asserted eight additional patents against the Cupertino-based company last week. Apple CEO Tim Cook told analysts during the company’s earnings call that he would rather settle lawsuits than fight them in court. “I’ve always hated litigation, and I continue to hate it. We just want people to invent their own stuff,” the CEO said. “I would highly prefer to settle versus battle. But the key thing is that it’s very important that Apple not become the developer for the world.” If the two companies cannot come to an agreement, a trial is scheduled for July in the United States.

Read

Even before the release of the first Android tablet and the Honeycomb operating system, Google predicted its partners would sell more than 10 million tablets a year beginning in 2011 and capture up to one-third of the market by 2012, The Verge reported. The information comes from Google’s testimony in an ongoing trial with Oracle. Android Senior Vice President Andy Rubin made the prediction based on tablet market data from Morgan Stanley, which estimated a total of 46 million tablets would be sold by 2012. The Mountain View-based company’s expectations have fallen short, however, and Apple has dominated the tablet market with more than 67 million iPads sold thus far. The Internet giant also expected Android tablets to generate up to $110 million in search revenue in 2011 and $220 million in 2012.

Read

Two years before the first commercial release of Android, Google shopped a device to carriers that contained a “basic phone user interface.” The Mountain View-based company approached T-Mobile and called the device a win-win when combined with the carrier’s unlimited data plan. The original designs surfaced during Google’s trial against Oracle over the use of Java in Android, The Verge reported. Additional documents revealed that Google was looking to change T-Mobile’s plan pricing structure, and offer unlimited data for $9.99 a month. To subsidize the reduced cost, the Internet giant would have agreed to not take the commission it might earn from the carrier when it referred Android buyers to its online store. Google’s original plan never became a reality, however, and the first commercial Android phone, the T-Mobile G1, was released with $25 and $35 data plans. A second image outlining additional details follows below.

Read [1] Read [2]

Voltage Pictures, the production studio behind the Oscar-winning film The Hurt Locker, has filed a new lawsuit in a federal court in Florida, according to TorrentFreak. The studio’s latest complaint targets at least 2,514 alleged BitTorrent users, whom Voltage Pictures claims pirated the film and cost the studio millions. The company last year filed a joint lawsuit against more than 30,000 alleged BitTorrent users who illegally downloaded the film. The case closed this past December, with Voltage Pictures collecting an undisclosed number of settlements. The studio’s latest suit looks to obtain a subpoena that will order ISPs to reveal the identities of the defendants. The alleged pirates will then be offered a settlement of about $3,000, the report claims. All of the defendants allegedly downloaded the film in 2010 and are Charter Communications subscribers.

Read

Despite Samsung and Apple’s chief executives scheduled settlement talks, the Korean manufacturer has asserted eight additional patents against the Cupertino-based company. Two of the patents are part of the fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory licenses (FRAND) because they are essential to ETSI standards, according to FOSS Patents. Five of the patents, including the two FRAND patents, were originally applied for and granted to Samsung, while three others were acquired from different owners. The two battling companies have been in a bitter patent war since last April that includes dozens of complaints across 10 countries. A trial regarding the eight new Samsung patents is scheduled for July in the United States.

Read