A San Jose jury rules against the nonpracticing entity, which had accused Apple of infringing its mobile device technology.
British police have come up with a new way of cutting off funding to websites that illegally share music and movies.
The jury has returned its verdict in this year's big Apple v. Samsung case. Check out what devices were found to violate which patents.
The Cupertino, Calif., company has argued throughout the trial that the case is not about Google and that Samsung copied Apple out of desperation.
The director of a new film about Silk Road says he found striking parallels between the issues surrounding the online drug bazaar and Napster, the original music-sharing service.
The Korean electronics maker now wants about $6.2 million, not $6.8 million, for Apple's accused infringement of two Samsung patents.
After defending itself against claims that it violated Apple's patents for the iPhone, the Korean electronics maker accused its smartphone rival of violating two Samsung patents.
Assuming Samsung infringed Apple's five patents, Apple should receive $1.75 per device in royalties, not the $40 Apple has requested, a Samsung expert argues. Samsung rested its case after the expert testimony.
Sony, Warner, and Universal argue that under state law, the music streaming service must pay license fees for songs recorded before 1972.
Several computer science professors, including Kevin Jeffay of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, testify that Samsung's devices don't infringe Apple's various patents and that Apple's patents aren't valid.