Not much about Public Interest Registry will change after its sale to Ethos Capital, the registry told ICANN in a response published Saturday. In December, ICANN queried PIR, its owner the Internet Society and buyer Ethos about the continuity of registry operations, nature of the proposed transaction, how the proposed new ownership structure would comply with the current registry agreement, and how the parties intend to keep their promises to serve the .org community (see 1912090002). PIR said its proposed change from the nonprofit "Public Interest Registry, a Pennsylvania corporation" to the for-profit "Public Interest Registry, LLC" won't amount to the creation of a new entity under law and that all of PIR's current debt, obligations and other liabilities will continue. If anything, PIR said, the transaction wouldn't jeopardize security of registry operations and "the infusion of outside resources only acts to strengthen PIR's position in the competitive marketplace." Management will remain and "continue to operate the business of PIR in a manner consistent with past practices in furtherance of the .ORG community," and back-end operations will still be served by Afilias. PIR noted many ICANN questions came from the new generic top-level domain applicants' guidebook and "do not apply to a fully functioning, legacy gTLD registry operator." PIR denied it knew ISOC was looking to sell the registry at the time the .org registry agreement was being renegotiated. The final version was posted in March, and PIR didn't know the registry was potentially for sale until July, it said. It wasn't aware until September that ISOC was considering an offer, and "was not involved in any process ISOC may have run with regards to the potential sale of the .ORG registry prior to" that time. ICANN doesn't have a timeline for making a decision about the deal, a spokesperson emailed Monday.

U.S. smartphone importers shifted toward Vietnam and from China in November, the last full month before then-U.S. scheduled imposition of 15 percent tariffs on Chinese handsets, said new Census Bureau data we accessed Thursday through the International Trade Commission. The Trump administration suspended the levies Dec. 13, less than 48 hours before they were to take effect (see 1912130062). China was 73.7 percent of the 21.1 million smartphones imported to the U.S. from all countries in November, down 5.8 points sequentially. The U.S. imported 4.6 million smartphones from Vietnam in November, a 21 percent increase sequentially and a 65 percent jump from November 2018.

Licensees with 5,000 or more unique sound recordings during the relevant annual calculation period are subject to an annual minimum fee of $60,000, the Copyright Royalty Board said Wednesday in final regulations for the Music Modernization Act’s mechanical licensing collective (see 1907080032).

The Patent and Trademark Office declared dead two December 2018 applications from Sharp’s Japanese parent company to trademark “NXT-GEN” for consumer TVs and monitors, agency records show. Both applications, one for a plain-text trademark, the other for a stylized logo, got provisional PTO approval June 4, pending Sharp’s filing of a statement of use (SOU) within six months or a request for a deadline extension. PTO ruled the applications abandoned Monday after Sharp filed neither by the Jan. 4 deadline. Agency rules require the SOU to prevent companies from hoarding trademarks they have no intention to commercialize in order just to keep them out of competitors' hands. Abandonment of the Sharp applications appears to render moot a possible controversy in CTA’s effort to register the NEXTGEN TV logo as a certification mark for ATSC 3.0 consumer products (see 1910020024). CTA risked “potential refusal” of its Sept. 25 trademark request because Sharp’s NXT-GEN filings were “prior-pending applications,” and there would have been “a likelihood of confusion between the marks,” the agency notified CTA Friday, three days before Sharp's applications died. Had they survived, CTA’s application would have faced “suspension” at the agency pending “final disposition” of the Sharp docket, said PTO. Sharp didn’t comment Wednesday on why it let its applications lapse, nor did CTA on averting the possible controversy.

Google began “willfully infringing” five Sonos patents for wireless multiroom audio technology when it introduced Chromecast Audio in 2015, alleged a Sonos complaint Tuesday (in Pacer) in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. “Google’s misappropriation of Sonos’s patented technology has only proliferated, as Google has expanded its wireless multi-room audio system to more than a dozen different infringing products,” it said. “Google has persisted despite the fact that Sonos has warned Google of its infringement on at least four separate occasions dating back to 2016.” Google has “profoundly compounded” the harm by using its multiroom audio products to “vacuum up invaluable consumer data” and “further entrench the Google platform” to “ultimately fuel its dominant advertising and search platforms,” alleged Sonos. Its actions “have caused significant damage to Sonos.” “Over the years, we have had numerous ongoing conversations with Sonos about both companies' IP rights," emailed Google Tuesday. "We are disappointed" that Sonos brought legal action "instead of continuing negotiations in good faith," it said. "We dispute these claims and will defend them vigorously.”

The Chinese government will offer legal services through "an intellectual property service station" at CES, to respond to intellectual property rights infringement injunctions, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said, according to an unofficial translation. "The service station employs American practicing lawyers from well-known American law firms to provide exhibitors with free legal advisory services on intellectual property rights and assist enterprises in resolving intellectual property infringement disputes," said MOFCOM. American companies in recent years have used emergency temporary injunctions to force seizures during past conferences, said MOFCOM. "Chinese companies as defendants should have sufficient time to refute infringement lawsuits to the court, but during the CES, American companies will declare that CES has only four days, and Chinese companies will leave after the end, so they can go to the court." The ministry provided the phrase in English that Chinese exhibitors should use for "police" who attempt to seal up a booth: "We will cooperate with you. We have lawyers who represent us. So before you seize our products, we would like to speak with our lawyer." Upon contact, one of the lawyers will rush to the scene, said MOFCOM. The Chinese Consulate General in San Francisco, MOFCOM and China Council for the Promotion of International Trade established the service station.

Apple filed to seal confidential information in FTC v. Qualcomm (see 1912020029). Qualcomm is appealing an FTC lawsuit over the company's alleged mobile chip monopoly. Apple wants to "intervene in this appeal solely for the purpose of moving to seal Apple’s confidential information,” it wrote the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, released Thursday evening and accepted the next day.

“Financial impacts” of the French digital services tax and DST “implications for the US tax base” worry the tech industry, posted international tax law expert Gary Sprague with Baker McKenzie in docket USTR-2019-0009. Sprague asked to testify for Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and others at the hearing Tuesday on the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s December finding that France’s DST discriminates against U.S. companies (see 1912030002). USTR is proposing to slap up to 100 percent retaliatory tariffs on 63 subheadings of French imports worth about $2.4 billion in 2018 customs value. Tech “strongly" backs the work of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to draft a “consensus solution” that would obviate the need for the French DST and similar other tax remedies that can harm U.S. interests, said Sprague. France's tax has “encouraged several other countries to pursue similar discriminatory taxes,” said Sprague, a member of the OECD technical advisory group studying the treatment of e-commerce revenue in tax treaties. The vast majority of the hundreds who have requested to testify are wine importers opposing the proposed tariffs on French goods. Written comments on USTR's proposed tariffs are due Monday. Post-hearing rebuttals are due Jan. 14.

Verance is adding Aspect-branded video watermarking to its suite of advertising and interactivity technologies, said the company Thursday. Aspect video watermarking “brings enhanced capabilities to the Aspect audio watermark that has already been deployed by major broadcasters,” it said.

A Long Island cardiologist accused Apple of stealing his atrial fibrillation-detection invention and building it into the Apple Watch. Joseph Wiesel, a board-certified cardiologist on the faculty of the New York University School of Medicine, landed a March 2006 patent for an “innovative approach” that “allowed patients to properly monitor atrial fibrillation in a non-hospital setting,” said his complaint (in Pacer) Friday in U.S. District Court in Central Islip, New York. “Prior to this, patients could only use manual palpation of the pulse to detect atrial fibrillation,” it said. Apple had “indisputable actual knowledge” of the patent since “at least as early” as September 2017 when it introduced the Series 4 Apple Watch with embedded atrial fibrillation-detection technology, said the complaint. That’s also when Wiesel first “engaged” Apple, “through numerous letters and claim charts,” with notice of its infringing practices, the complaint said. Apple since has compounded its bad behavior by introducing the technology into the Series 5, “but also updating the software on the existing legacy Series 1, 2, and 3 Apple Watches to enable the infringing features,” it alleged. Apple has “refused to negotiate in good faith to avoid this lawsuit,” it said. Apple’s actions, “despite continued warnings,” are evidence of a “willful disregard” of Wiesel’s rights “and a desire to profit irrespective of U.S. patent laws,” it said. Wiesel seeks “recovery of past damages” through payment of a “reasonable royalty” and is "entitled" to license fees on Apple Watch shipments on “a going-forward basis,” it said. Apple didn’t comment Tuesday.