Qualcomm wants to ban on sales iPhone X in US

The legal battle between Qualcomm and Apple took another turn last week when the chip maker filed a request with the US International Trade Commission to ban the sale of the new iPhone X and other iPhones that use the company’s modem.

Qualcomm alleges that Apple is infringing on 16 of their patents with the iPhone 7, 8, and X, as well as the Plus models of the phones. Many of those patents cover technology used to improve the battery life of the phone, and others on additional phone tech.

Qualcomm also alleges that in one case, Apple is using its patented technology to create the Portrait Mode effect on the iPhone.

In the lawsuits, Qualcomm didn’t specify the amount in payments the company is after for the alleged patent infringement, but asked
the court to stop Apple from using the technologies.

Qualcomm also asks for imports of the new iPhone Xs that are using modems from rival company Intel, to be banned, which means the phones can’t be sold through AT&T or T-Mobile, unless the modems from those phones were bought from Qualcomm.

In the filing, Qualcomm said Apple can import iPhones that don’t infringe on the patents listed in the action, but the phone maker doesn’t have the right to infringe on Qualcomm’s patents through the sale of the iPhone.

The company added that the filing was done to prevent such infringement and reward innovation, which is what the patent system was designed to do in the first place.

Apple refused to comment on the filing, but the company referred to a previous filing in which the company said the iPhone is the reason people fell in love with smartphones, which continues to push them to create and innovate new technologies and products like the iPhone X’s Face ID.

Apple also added that Qualcomm is making grossly inflated claims about its role in the development of smartphones because facts show that it was Apple that put a computer phone in peoples’ hands, not Qualcomm.

The filing by Qualcomm last week is the latest move in what has become a petty battle between two tech giants.

In January, Apple filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Qualcomm, saying the chipmaker didn’t give fair terms for its technology, in an attempt to pay a lower amount for using Qualcomm’s technology.

Qualcomm responded by suing Apple for patent infringement and asking for a ban on iPhone sales, while maintaining that no modern phone, including the iPhone would have been possible without their technology.

IPhone X The Review

After months of anticipation and speculation, Apple finally released the iPhone X, and from what we have seen so far, it was definitely worth the wait.

The first thing that stands out when you see the new iPhone is the design change, which is the most significant design change the company has made so far.

The home button, which iPhone users have been using since the first model, has been done away with, meaning the iPhone X doesn’t use Touch ID anymore. With the Touch ID gone, the phone now has a nearly all-screen design, which will take some getting used to.

In place of the Touch ID, Apple added the new Face ID, which means instead of unlocking your iPhone with your fingerprint, you now have to unlock it with your face, which seems pretty cool at first.

However, upon using the new Face ID, some might prefer Apple going back to the Touch ID because the Face ID slows down the process of unlocking your phone, and sometimes, it doesn’t even work at all.

When Apple first introduced the Touch ID, there were a few glitches, but they were able to sort them out in the subsequent releases, so I expect the same to happen with the Face ID.

Now that we have dealt with the biggest issue people have with the phone, it’s time to take a look at some of the things that work. The iPhone X comes with the extremely fast six-core A11 Bionic processor, and is also water resistant.

The phone also comes with two rear cameras, which are even better than the cameras in the iPhone 8 Plus, which have been called the best smartphone cameras. The iPhone X can also be wirelessly charged, and comes with the glass-backed design that enables it.

Like the previous edition, the iPhone X doesn’t have a headset jack, but that shouldn’t be a big deal for people that have the iPhone 8 because they are used to not having one by now.

When it came to the drop test, the iPhone X didn’t perform very well and the screen cracked after a small drop. Because of this, it is highly recommended that you not only buy a case to protect the phone, you should also consider getting insurance or a third-party warranty, like AppleCare Plus, to save yourself some money if the screen ever cracks.

With the hefty price tag that comes with the phone, you definitely don’t want to pay the manufacturer’s price if anything happens to the phone.

With a 5.8 display screen, the iPhone X has the biggest display, even bigger than the 5.5 inch screen the iPhone 8 Plus comes with.


The price tag may scare a few people off, but after using this phone for a few weeks, I can honestly say it is the best iPhone ever made, and definitely the best smartphone available right now.

Uber loses bid to appeal driver case to UK Supreme Court

Uber’s appeal in a case concerning workers’ rights has been turned down by the Supreme Court. The taxi company had submitted a request to appeal the case directly to the Supreme Court instead of going to Appeal Court two weeks ago. A British tribunal had ruled against them stating that the company’s divers were entitled to workers’ rights like a minimum wage, vacations among others. The company had argued that the drivers were self-employed and were not entitled to such benefits.

After the ruling, the company decided to head straight to the Supreme Court, but now they have to go through a step they had avoided. The decision by the Supreme Court meant that the Appeal Court would have to hear the case first.

Yaseen Aslam, a member of the drivers’ union, the IWGB welcomed the news and was confident they would beat the company again even in the Appeal Court. He
said that the denial of permission to go straight to the Supreme Court gave the company a second chance to settle things down with its drivers. Yaseen Aslam had castigated Uber for abusing its drivers and acting unlawfully. Yaseen had been taken an active part since 2014 in campaigning against the tax company to see to it that the company recognises and give their workers their rights.

Jason Moyer-Lee, IWGB General Secretary through an e-mailed statement, said the taxi company’s legal strategy had received yet another blow after denying their workers to enjoy their entitled benefits. Jason said the company was wasting time and should instead treat their workers according to the workers’ rights instead of camping at the corridors of Justice.

Uber has been sailing on rough waters lately where they have suffered several legal blows. One such blow was losing their renewal of licence in September to operate in London following the city’s transport regulator saying the company was not fit to serve the capital. Their employment practices have been questioned by the MPs on the Business, Industrial Strategy and Energy Committee. They have written to the company questioning the safety of their workers and their passengers.

The company have not been able to give satisfactory information in regards to the introduction of driver hour limits in the UK. The company was not even able to account on the number of drivers working over 70 and 80 hours weekly saying under 6% of the drivers spend over 60 hrs while signed in to their work in a weekly basis.