Strategy in TECH...
The Control4 Corporation has been hit with another class action lawsuit filed on behalf of all shareholders of their stock in connection with their acquisition by Wirepath Home Systems, LLC – better known as SnapAV. Filed by the law firm of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., the lawsuit alleges certain violations of Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and names both Control4 and its Board of Directors as defendants.
Strata-gee reported yesterday that late last week Sonos had filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Lenbrook Industries Limited and Lenbrook America. This suit, which is almost identical to the one Sonos had successfully pursued with D&M Holdings and Denon over its HEOS line, was resolved in Sonos’s favor a little over a year ago.
Now we have Lenbrook’s response to this development – the company says it will “defend vigorously the claims of patent infringement made by computer audio company Sonos…”
Strata-gee reported just yesterday that Sonos, Inc. has sued Lenbrook Industries Ltd. & Lenbrook America – the maker & marketer of Bluesound – for patent infringement. Undoubtedly emboldened by their near-complete victory over Denon’s HEOS brand a little over a year ago, Sonos appears to have targeted Lenbrook to be next in line.
However, Strata-gee has learned that Lenbrook is not the only company targeted for such potential actions by Sonos. There are more – perhaps many more – in our industry lined up for this “hit” parade.
On Thursday last week, Sonos, Inc. (NASDAQ: SONO) filed another patent infringement lawsuit, this time against Lenbrook Industries Limited and Lenbrook America Corp. At issue here is Lenbrook’s Bluesound brand launched back in 2013 to great fanfare as Strata-gee reported on at the time…and also discussed here…and which Sonos claims infringes on multiple Sonos patents.
In June, after significant outreach by many Strata-gee readers, we posted our take on the Monster Products, Inc. (Monster) S-1 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in which Monster sought to launch its own Monster Money cryptocurrency in a major shift in the company’s direction. This SEC filing by Monster was at the end of May, and our story [see: Is Monster Money a Massive Mistake?] was posted June 13th.
We have just discovered that days after our story appeared, Monster received an SEC staff letter dated June 15th titled “SERIOUS DEFICIENCIES.” But that’s not all we discovered…
The European Commission, the EU’s antitrust regulatory unit, after a 17-month investigation of online price fixing and other illegal anti-competitive practices has levied a fine of €111.2 million ($130 million) against four prominent consumer electronics brands, including Pioneer Corp., D&M Holdings Inc. of Japan, Koninklijke Philips NV of the Netherlands, and AsusTek Computer, Inc. of Taiwan. The companies were alleged to have imposed fixed or minimum online prices for their products.
On Friday last week, we learned that Sonos and D&M Holdings have settled their litigation, first begun in October 2014. Although the terms of the settlement are confidential, all actions taken by each party are now moot.
It is likely that the parties now enjoy some form of licensing arrangement that put all adversarial issues behind them.
When it comes to politics in today’s world, it is an understatement to suggest that we live in divided times. Although our founding fathers imagined passionate (but healthy) debate leading to the best possible compromise solutions – today, it seems as though our representatives are more likely to throw a hand-grenade than an idea to the other side of the aisle. But recently, a new study has come out to suggest that an issue has arisen that has brought Americans together – and it spells trouble for the tech industry.
Facebook finds themselves square in the middle of a political and public relations fire storm, as news of the firms connection to Cambridge Analytica and the harvesting of the personal data on at least 50 million Facebook users, including perhaps you and I, have recently received a lot of news coverage. Now word comes via two new polls that the company’s brand has taken a serious hit in the eyes of their users and former fans.
When we last visited this legal clash of the titans, a jury had just found that Monster must pay Beats nearly $8 million to reimburse them for the legal expenses in fighting the lawsuit that Monster had brought against them in 2015. Now, we have learned that the judge in that case has increased the judgment with an additional “directed” verdict. And in the matter of a separate case, Beats vs. Monster filed late last year, Monster has filed a countersuit and won a key ruling.
