John Roberts - News, Features, and Slideshows

News

• Supreme Court justices hold stock in tech vendors, other firms

  Two U.S. Supreme Court justices owned stock in tech vendors or other companies that filed briefs in cases under review by the high court in the past year, a watchdog group said Thursday.

• Supreme Court: Violent Facebook posts not criminal

  A Pennsylvania man who posted violent rap lyrics and other comments on Facebook about his estranged wife, an FBI agent and nearby elementary schools is not guilty of making criminal threats, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided.

• 2014: The year in quotes

  From rattled airline passengers who fear the coming of smartphones to jurors who don't know a smartphone from a tablet, here are some of the colorful quotes from IT news in 2014.

• Lawyers ask US Supreme Court to limit mobile phone searches

  Police shouldn't be able to search suspects' mobile phones at the time of arrest because of the huge amounts of private information now stored on those devices, lawyers for two criminal defendants argued before U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday.

• Aereo argues that ruling against it could hurt cloud storage business

  If the U.S. Supreme Court rules that streaming video provider Aereo violates the copyrights of TV networks, it may also put cloud storage services at risk, the company's lawyer argued Monday.

• Supreme Court could limit software patents in Alice case

  A case before the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week could have a huge impact on business-method and software patents, with some experts concerned that the court could put significant limits on what can be patented.

• Supreme Cout justices question some software patents

  The U.S. Supreme Court could wipe out a whole swath of software and business-method patents if justices invalidate four electronic-trading patents, an attorney for patent-owner Alice said.

• US Supreme Court justices question surveillance secrecy

  U.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday questioned the legitimacy of a law allowing a secretive government surveillance program and the assertion by a government lawyer that some groups couldn't challenge the law in court because they don't know if they've been spied on.