New Sony online store offers remote downloads to PlayStation and mobile devices

Read More..

Viral rapper PSY apologizes for anti-US protests

South Korean rapper and Internet sensation PSY is apologizing to Americans for participating in anti-U.S. protests several years ago.

Park Jae-sang, who performs as PSY, issued a statement Friday after reports surfaced that he had participated in concerts protesting the U.S. military presence in South Korea during the early stages of the Iraq war.

At a 2004 concert, the "Gangnam Style" rapper performs a song with lyrics about killing "Yankees" who have been torturing Iraqi captives and their families "slowly and painfully." During a 2002 concert, he smashed a model of a U.S. tank on stage.

"While I'm grateful for the freedom to express one's self, I've learned there are limits to what language is appropriate and I'm deeply sorry for how these lyrics could be interpreted," he wrote in the statement. "I will forever be sorry for any pain I have caused by those words."

The 34-year-old rapper says the protests were part of a "deeply emotional" reaction to the war and the death of two Korean school girls, who were killed when a U.S. military vehicle hit them as they walked alongside the road. He noted anti-war sentiment was high around the world at the time.

PSY attended college in the U.S. and says he understands the sacrifices U.S. military members have made to protect South Korea and other nations. He has recently performed in front of servicemen and women.

"And I hope they and all Americans can accept my apology," he wrote. "While it's important that we express our opinions, I deeply regret the inflammatory and inappropriate language I used to do so. In my music, I try to give people a release, a reason to smile. I have learned that thru music, our universal language we can all come together as a culture of humanity and I hope that you will accept my apology."

His participation in the protests was no secret in South Korea, where the U.S. has had a large military presence since the Korean War, but was not generally known in America until recent news reports.

PSY did not write "Dear American," a song by the Korean band N.EX.T, but he does perform it. The song exhorts the listener to kill the Yankees who are torturing Iraqi captives, their superiors who ordered the torture and their families. At one point he raps: "Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law, and fathers/Kill them all slowly and painfully."

PSY launched to international acclaim based on the viral nature of his "Gangnam Style" video. It became YouTube's most watched video, making him a millionaire who freely crossed cultural boundaries around the world. Much of that success has happened in the U.S., where the rapper has managed to weave himself into pop culture.

He recently appeared on the American Music Awards, dancing alongside MC Hammer in a melding of memorable dance moves that book-end the last two decades. And the Internet is awash with copycat versions of the song. Even former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, the 81-year-old co-chairman of President Barack Obama's deficit commission, got in on the fun, recently using the song in a video to urge young Americans to avoid credit card debt.

It remains to be seen how PSY's American fans will react. Obama, the father of two pop music fans, wasn't letting the news change his plans, though.

Earlier Friday, the White House confirmed Obama and his family will attend a Dec. 21 charity concert where PSY is among the performers. A spokesman says it's customary for the president to attend the "Christmas in Washington" concert, which will be broadcast on TNT. The White House has no role in choosing performers for the event, which benefits the National Children's Medical Center.

Read More..

Justices to Take Up Generic Drug Case

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would decide whether a pharmaceutical company should be allowed to pay a competitor millions of dollars to keep a generic copy of a best-selling drug off the market.

Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

Ralph Neas, head of the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, said the case would alter the marketing of new generics.

The case could settle a decade-long battle between federal regulators, who say the deals violate antitrust law, and the pharmaceutical industry, which contends that they are really just settlements of disputes over patents that protect the billions of dollars they pour into research and development.

Three separate federal circuit courts of appeal have ruled over the last decade that the deals were allowable. But in July a federal appeals court in Philadelphia — which covers the territory where many big drug makers are based — said the arrangements were anticompetitive.

Both sides in the case supported the petition for the Supreme Court to decide the case, each arguing that the conflicting appeals court decisions would inject uncertainty into their operations.

By keeping lower-priced generic drugs off the market, drug companies are able to charge higher prices than they otherwise could. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a Senate bill to outlaw those payments would lower drug costs in the United States by $11 billion and would save the federal government $4.8 billion over 10 years.

Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican who co-sponsored the Senate bill, which never came to the floor for a vote, praised the decision.

The Federal Trade Commission first filed the suit in question in 2009. Jon Leibowitz, chairman of the F.T.C., said, “These pay-for-delay deals are win-win for the drug companies, but big losers for U.S. consumers and taxpayers.”

Generic drug makers say that the payments preserve a system that has saved American consumers hundreds of billions of dollars.

“This case could determine how an entire industry does business because it would dramatically affect the economics of each decision to introduce a new generic drug,” Ralph G. Neas, president of the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, said in a statement. “The current industry paradigm of challenging patents on branded drugs in order to bring new generics to market as soon as possible has produced $1.06 trillion in savings over the past 10 years.”

The case will review a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, which in the spring ruled in favor of the drug makers, Watson Pharmaceuticals and Solvay Pharmaceuticals. Watson had applied for federal approval to sell a generic version of AndroGel, a testosterone replacement drug made by Solvay.

While courts have long held that paying a competitor to stay off the market creates unfair competition, the pharmaceuticals case is different because it involves patents, whose essential purpose is to prevent competition.

When a generic manufacturer seeks approval to market a copy of a brand-name drug, it also often files a lawsuit challenging a patent that the drug’s originator says prevents competition.

Last year, for the third time since 2003, the 11th Circuit upheld the agreements as long as the allegedly anticompetitive behavior that results — in this case, keeping the generic drug off the market — is the same thing that would take place if the brand-name company’s patent were upheld.

Two other federal circuit courts, the Second Circuit and the Federal Circuit, have ruled similarly. But in July, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals said that those arrangements were anticompetitive on their face and violated antitrust law.

The agreements are also affected by a peculiar condition in the law that legalized generic competition for prescription drugs. That law, known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, gives a 180-day period of exclusivity to the first generic drug maker to file for approval of a generic copy and to file a lawsuit challenging the brand-name drug’s patent.

Brand-name drug companies have taken advantage of that law, finding that they can settle the patent suit by getting the generic company to agree to stay out of the market for a period of time. Because that generic company also has exclusivity rights, no other generic companies can enter the market.

Michael A. Carrier, a professor at Rutgers School of Law-Camden, said that while there were provisions in the law under which a generic company could forfeit that exclusivity, “they really are toothless in practice.”

One wild card could still prevent the Supreme Court from definitively settling the question. In granting the petition to hear the case, the Supreme Court said that Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. recused himself, taking no part in the consideration or decision.

That opens the possibility that a 4-4 decision could result, upholding the lower court case that went against the F.T.C. and in favor of the drug makers. But it would leave the broader question for another day.

The case is Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals et al, No. 12-416.

Read More..

Election is over, but 'super PACs' remain a threat

Just as the devil's finest trick is persuading you that he doesn't exist (according to the poet Baudelaire), the best trick of big-money political donors may be persuading Americans that Citizens United doesn't matter.

Citizens United, of course, is the infamous 2010 ruling by the Supreme Court that overturned limits on political spending via ostensibly independent groups, and thereby unleashed a torrent of donations from corporations and wealthy individuals in presidential and congressional election cycles.

One of the big post-election punditry themes after last month's election was that it showed big-time spending couldn't help donors like Las Vegas mogul Sheldon Adelson get their way and might even have worked against them. A determined Obama foe, Adelson donated $20 million to a "super PAC" supporting Mitt Romney, and at least $32 million more to other conservative groups in an election widely seen as a rout of the right wing. The conclusion was: Hoo boy, did he waste his money.

This sort of schadenfreude by liberals and progressives — or is it "Sheldonfreude"? — is misplaced and dangerous. Influence by corporations and the wealthy still counts for a lot in our electoral process, and it's only going to count for more. Citizens United still needs an antidote.

"People are too complacent," says Fred Wertheimer, a veteran public interest advocate who currently heads Democracy 21, a Washington nonprofit devoted to campaign finance reform. "The larger issue is the ability to buy influence over government policies, and that's operating in full force regardless of the outcomes of particular races."

Nor is it entirely correct to say that the Citizens United style of spending failed because more Democrats than Republicans prevailed at the polls. "There was super PAC money on both sides," says Larry Noble, president of Americans for Campaign Reform, a Concord, N.H.-based nonprofit seeking to dilute the influence of private money in elections. "They may not have determined the election, but you can't say they didn't have any influence."

Super PACs are a species of political organization that can raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions, and individuals and spend the money for or against specific candidates; they're merely barred from directly coordinating with the candidates they back, a porous and easily finessed limitation.

Federal election records show that the biggest ones this year were Restore Our Future, which spent $143 million in support of Romney; the Karl Rove-affiliated American Crossroads, which spent $124 million for conservative causes; and Priorities USA Action, which spent $78 million in support of President Obama.

"The candidates are happy you made those donations," Noble says. "And as long as the candidates are happy, that money will continue to flow."

The impulse to please big donors to keep the money flowing visibly narrows the breadth of debate in Washington, where raising the top marginal income tax rate by 4.6 percentage points, to 39.6%, is treated as the absolute limit on taxation of the wealthy. For most of the Reagan administration, the top rate was 50% or higher.

This mind-set reflects the outsized influence of a small clutch of wealthy individuals and corporate donors. According to a study by the nonprofit progressive organizations Demos and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, contributions to super PACs by just 61 large donors averaging $4.7 million each matched the combined donations of 1.4 million donors of $250 or less to the Romney and Obama campaigns.

Whose voices are likely to resonate more loudly in the halls of the White House and Congress — the 61 donors or the 1.4 million?

That's why the Washington debate over the "fiscal cliff" has boiled down to a discussion about how to impose long-term sacrifices on average working men and women by gutting their retirement and healthcare benefits, while leaving those who earn more than $250,000 a year better off.

That side of the debate is being spearheaded by corporate CEOs organized as the Campaign to Fix the Debt. It has close ties to Peter G. Peterson, a hedge fund billionaire who has spent millions in a decades-long attack on Social Security and Medicare. (There are also links between Peterson and Americans for Campaign Reform.)

The organization's most prominent spokesmodels, such as Honeywell Chairman and Chief Executive David M. Cote, are tolerably well insulated from the sacrifices they advocate as part of a fiscal-cliff solution. Cote is a member of Fix the Debt's steering committee. As of the end of last year, Honeywell calculated the present value of the pension benefits due him upon retirement at $36.2 million.

He accumulated those benefits over a period of less than 10 years in his job and is entitled to collect at age 60, which means he's eligible this year. (The figures come from Honeywell's latest proxy statement.)

According to several commercial annuity calculators, Cote's accumulated benefits might yield him a monthly stipend of $150,000 to $175,000 today. For comparison's sake, the monthly Social Security retirement benefit for the average worker is $1,230 this year — and that's for a worker who likely earned benefits from 45 years of labor, not 10, and retired at age 66, not 60. By the way, Honeywell's employee pension plan was underfunded at the end of last year to the tune of $2.76 billion, a deficit of 18%.

The most important point to make about big donations in the 2012 election is that they may have been ineffective, especially on the conservative side, because they were deployed stupidly.

Romney and his GOP supporters sank their money into overpriced and transparently fatuous advertisements, while the Obama camp invested frugally on ads and heavily on ground-level organizing. But people like Sheldon Adelson didn't accumulate their wealth by being stupid, and it's a safe bet they won't make the same mistakes again.

The best counterweights to Citizens United lie in tightening up disclosure rules, to combat a trend that saw donors of as much as 37% of the donations to outside campaign groups remaining unidentified. That's $125 million, contributed mostly through "social welfare" organizations and business leagues that are allowed to keep their donors secret but aren't supposed to engage chiefly in electioneering. Clearly that's a regulation that's been flagrantly flouted.

Another good idea is to magnify the weight of small donations to tip the scale back toward the average voter. That's the goal of the Empowering Citizens Act, sponsored by Reps. David Price (D-N.C.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) By providing a public match of 5 to 1 for the first $250 of any individual's contribution to a presidential or congressional candidate, the measure aims to raise incentives for individuals to donate and for candidates to seek small donations.

Without some way of redressing the imbalance between big donors and small, "the great danger of huge contributions buying influence over government decisions at the expense of ordinary Americans is going to be in full play," says Wertheimer, whose organization endorses the Empowering Citizens Act.

"This is just Year One" of the post-Citizens United era, he adds. "Already we saw $1 billion in unlimited contributions raised by super PACs and social welfare organizations. We're going to have an arms race."

Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.

Read More..

Judge may lower Apple's award in Samsung patent case

By Jessica Guynn, Los Angeles Times

December 6, 2012, 8:42 p.m.

SAN JOSE — A federal judge signaled Thursday that she might reduce Apple Inc.'s $1-billion jury award in its patent infringement case with Samsung Electronics Co.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh did not specify by how much she might shave the award, but during a marathon afternoon hearing in federal court in San Jose she said it did appear that the jury had miscalculated damages.

In August, after three days of deliberations in the complex patent case, a jury awarded Apple more than $1 billion.

In the months since the verdict, Samsung has mounted an aggressive campaign to overturn the verdict, raising a host of legal issues including juror misconduct. Apple hotly contested those issues during the hearing Thursday and sought to increase the damage award.

Lawyers for the world's two largest smartphone makers sparred for more than three hours over a bevy of legal issues in the dispute that produced one of the largest damage awards in an intellectual property case. Koh said she would issue rulings in the coming weeks.

Samsung argued that the damage award should be reduced because the jury incorrectly calculated the amount. Apple asked the court to award $535 million more in damages because the jury found that Samsung had willfully infringed Apple's patents.

Both sides seemed to be gearing up for years of legal appeals despite the judge's plea for "global peace." The case is likely to go before the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the Washington court that decides patent disputes, and perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court.

Apple also asked the judge to ban some Samsung products. The judge did not rule on whether the infringing Samsung products should be taken off store shelves.

The products are older models and would not dent Samsung sales, but the ban would give Apple a win in its high-stakes patent war against the South Korean company that is playing out around the globe.

ALSO:

NASA releases breathtaking images of the Earth at night

Samsung lawyers file copy of Apple patent settlement with HTC

Facebook voters: Everything you need to know to cast your ballot

jessica.guynn@latimes.com

Read More..

Apple to return some Mac production to U.S. in 2013

SAN FRANCISCO/NEW YORK (Reuters) – Apple Inc plans to move some production of Macintosh computers to the United States from China next year, Chief Executive Tim Cook said in remarks published on Thursday, in what could be a important test of the nascent comeback in U.S. electronics manufacturing.

Apple makes the majority of its products, from Macs to the iPhone and iPad, in China, the world’s factory floor for electronics. But like other U.S. corporations, it has come under fire for relying on low-cost Asian labor and contributing to the decline of the U.S. manufacturing sector.

Cook did not say which Macintosh products will be produced in the United States. But the effort is expected to go well beyond simple final assembly of devices, with Apple and unnamed partners building most or all of the components in the United States as well.

The company will spend more than $ 100 million on the U.S. manufacturing initiative, Cook said in an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, published on Thursday.

“This doesn’t mean that Apple will do it ourselves, but we’ll be working with people and we’ll be investing our money,” Cook said.

He told NBC’s “Rock Center” program, in an interview to be aired later Thursday, that only one of the existing Mac product lines would be manufactured exclusively in the United States.

Apple declined to comment beyond the interview.

Apple’s decision, hailed by some analysts as an important first step even if it affected a tiny fraction of its overall output, was dismissed by others who saw it as an opportunistic public relations ploy with little effect on jobs.

Some Apple suppliers were struggling to assess its impact.

“At the end of the day, Apple knows moving production to the U.S. means lower profits for Apple,” said a senior executive at Taiwan’s Quanta Computer Inc who declined to be named because of the companies’ business relationship.

“If Apple is really serious about moving production to the U.S., they would need to invest 10 times or even 100 times of that amount. We see only a minor impact on Apple suppliers.”

Cross Research analyst Shannon Cross said it made sense for Apple to bring some manufacturing back to the United States, because some components were already being produced there.

Also, while cheaper labor costs have been a key factor in encouraging U.S. manufacturers to move production to China, wages and other costs have risen sharply – particularly in the main coastal manufacturing centers. Labor costs, moreover, account for only a tiny portion of overall expenses: the research firm iSupply says the total cost, including labor, for final manufacturing of an iPhone 5 is just $ 8.

Experts estimate that the total base cost of all components that go into the gadget, or bill of materials, comes to around $ 200.

Cross pointed to other potential benefits of U.S. manufacturing, including mitigating the risk of intellectual property theft.

Cook has said in the past that he would like to see more of the company’s products assembled back home, but declining U.S. manufacturing expertise made that difficult. Apple makes applications processors for the iPad and iPhone via Samsung Electronics in Austin, Texas, and sources glass for the same devices from a Corning facility in Kentucky.

IHS iSuppli, a research firm that tracks supply chains, said the company now outsources production of notebook personal computers to Taiwan’s Quanta Inc and Foxconn, which also makes the iPhone and iPad, and Pegatron Corp. Foxconn and Quanta have U.S. facilities.

“Apple’s move appears to be a symbolic effort to help improve its public image, which has been battered in recent years by reports of labor issues at its contract manufacturing partners in Asia,” Craig Stice, senior principal analyst for computer systems at His. “However, given Apple’s high profile in the market, the company’s ‘insourcing’ initiative could compel other companies to follow suit and transfer production to the United States over the next few years.”

Apple’s stock rose 1.6 percent on Thursday, a tepid bounceback from Wednesday’s 6.4 percent dive that was its biggest single-day loss in almost four years.

MAKING STRIDES

Analysts say the stock, which has fallen steadily since September, has come under pressure from investors worried about the rapidly intensifying competition from Google Inc’s Android products.

Samsung, in particular, has emerged as a formidable competitor, chipping away at Apple’s dominance in the tablet market and leading the smartphone pack in China, where the U.S. company’s smartphone market ranking fell to No. 6 in the third quarter from No. 4 in the previous three months, research outfit IDC estimates.

Samsung’s stock has climbed 8 percent since the end of September.

Apple’s domestic manufacturing effort will likely buy the brand some goodwill at home, where the debate about off-shoring has heated up as the economy sputters along. It has also come under fire for excessive working hours and dismal conditions at Foxconn’s plants in China, and critics have accused Apple of helping to create a high-stress environment for migrant workers.

Beyond the marketing boost, some analysts said Apple could blaze a trail should it prove that American manufacturing of electronics can be profitable.

“It seems to me like a nice time for Apple to do something,” Gartner analyst Carolina Milanesi said. “If it can be a profitable business, and others follow, then Apple has shown the way.”

Others were skeptical that Apple’s latest move was much more than a symbolic gesture.

“Such a strategy has been used by other companies in the past, which had no actual impact on their outsourcing,” said Li Qiang, director of New York-based China Labor Watch, in an emailed statement.

“The key question is how many jobs (percentage of the entire workforce) and what kind of jobs (production or administration) are to be moved back. I don’t think Apple is ready to relocate a large percentage of its production jobs back to U.S.”

Earlier this year, Google made waves when it announced it would build its Nexus Q home entertainment streaming device – deemed by many analysts to be an experimental product – in the heart of Silicon Valley. Google said it hoped to speed up innovation on the device and improve time-to-market.

Lenovo Group Ltd – China’s largest PC maker – said this year it will move a limited amount of computer manufacturing to North Carolina, to be closer to the market.

“Lenovo’s announcement appears to have flown under the radar,” said Jeffrey Wu, senior analyst for OEM research at IHS.

“Apple is a company that is always in the spotlight, and the company’s image sets the standard in the PC world. If Apple is doing it, will others follow?”

(Additional reporting by Faith Hung in TAIPEI, Lucy Hornby in BEIJING and Lee Chyen Yee in HONG KONG; Editing by Maureen Bavdek, Richard Chang and Ken Wills)

Tech News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

AP Interview: Jackson, cast discuss 'The Hobbit'

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — Many fans are eagerly anticipating a return to the fictional world of Middle-earth with next week's general release of the first movie in "The Hobbit" trilogy. Director Peter Jackson and the film's stars speak to The Associated Press about making "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey":

— Jackson on shooting at 48 frames per second instead of the standard 24: "We've seen the arrival of iPhones and iPads and now there's a generation of kids — the worry that I have is that they seem to think it's OK to wait for the film to come out on DVD or be available for download. And I don't want kids to see 'The Hobbit' on their iPads, really. Not for the first time. So as a filmmaker, I feel the responsibility to say, 'This is the technology we have now, and it's different ... How can we raise the bar? Why do we have to stick with 24 frames? ...'"

"The world has to move on and change. And I want to get people back into the cinema. I want to play my little tiny role in encouraging that beautiful, magical, mysterious experience of going into a dark room full of strangers, and being transported into a piece of escapism."

— Martin Freeman (Bilbo Baggins) on shooting some scenes without other actors around: "I must admit I found the green screen and all that easier than I thought I would. ... I found the technical aspect of it quite doable. Some of it's difficult, but it's quite enjoyable, actually. It taps into when I used to play 'war' as a 6-year-old. And the Germans were all imaginary. Because I was playing a British person. So yeah, I was on the right side. ..."

On marrying his performance to that of Ian Holm, who played an older Bilbo Baggins in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy: "I knew I couldn't be a slave to it. Because as truly fantastic as Ian Holm is in everything, and certainly as Bilbo, I can't just go and do an impression of Ian Holm for a year and a half. Because it's my turn. But it was very useful for me to watch and listen to stuff he did, vocal ticks or physical ticks, that I can use but not feel hamstrung by."

— Hugo Weaving (Elrond) on the differences in tone to the "Rings" trilogy: "This one feels lighter, more buoyant, but it's got quite profoundly moving sequences in it, too ... I think it's very different in many ways, and yet it's absolutely the same filmmaker, and you are inhabiting the same world."

— Elijah Wood (Frodo) on returning to Middle-earth in a cameo role: "It was a gift to come back ... what they'd constructed was such a beautiful remembrance of the characters from the original trilogy."

— Cate Blanchett (Galadriel) on the toughest part of filming: "Trying to keep my children off the set."

— Richard Armitage (Thorin Oakenshield) on being a 6-foot-2 guy playing a dwarf: "It's amazing how quickly you get used to it. And also, we spent most of the shoot much bigger than a 6-foot-2 guy. I mean, I had lifts in my shoes, I was wider, I was taller, and bigger-haired. And I actually think that was quite an interesting place to be, because I do think dwarfs have big ideas about themselves ..."

— Andy Serkis (Gollum) on taking on the additional role of second-unit director: "There were only a couple of times where there were really, really black days where I went away thinking, 'This is it. I can't do it.' But on the whole, Pete (Jackson) was so brilliant at allowing me to set stuff up and then critiquing my work ... but at least I would have my stab at it."

On the film itself: "I think it's a great story. I think it's a beautifully crafted film with great heart. A rollicking adventure, and it feels to me like this really massive feast that everyone will enjoy eating."

Read More..

Recipes for Health: Warm Hummus — Recipes for Health

Andrew Scrivani for The New York Times

In this comforting Turkish version of hummus the chickpea purée is warmed in the oven and topped with pine nuts. In the authentic version, a generous amount of melted butter would be drizzled over the top before baking. I have substituted a moderate amount of olive oil for the butter.

2 garlic cloves

2 cups cooked chickpeas (if using canned, rinse thoroughly)

Salt to taste

1 teaspoon cumin seeds, lightly toasted and ground

1/4 cup extra virgin olive oil

3 tablespoons lemon juice (more to taste)

3 tablespoons sesame tahini

1 tablespoon pine nuts

1/2 teaspoon Turkish red pepper or Aleppo pepper

1. Heat the oven to 400 degrees. Oil a small baking dish or oven-proof bowl. Turn on a food processor fitted with the steel blade and drop in the garlic. Process until the garlic adheres to the sides of the bowls. Turn off the machine and scrape down the sides of the bowl. Add the chickpeas and cumin and turn on the machine.

2. Combine 3 tablespoons of the olive oil, the lemon juice, and the tahini, and add to the machine. Process until the mixture is smooth. Season to taste with salt. Scrape into the baking dish or bowl. Drizzle on the remaining tablespoon of olive oil and sprinkle on the pine nuts and red or Aleppo pepper.

3. Bake for 10 to 15 minutes and serve hot with pita bread.

Yield: 2 cups

Advance preparation: The hummus can be made a day ahead, but don’t garnish it with the olive oil, pine nuts and red pepper until ready to serve. Leftovers will keep for three or four days in the refrigerator.

Nutritional information per tablespoon: 42 calories; 3 grams fat; 0 grams saturated fat; 1 gram polyunsaturated fat; 2 grams monounsaturated fat; 0 milligrams cholesterol; 3 grams carbohydrates; 1 gram dietary fiber; 1 milligram sodium (does not include salt to taste); 1 gram protein

Martha Rose Shulman is the author of “The Very Best of Recipes for Health.”

Read More..

Judge may lower Apple's award in Samsung patent case

By Jessica Guynn, Los Angeles Times

December 6, 2012, 8:42 p.m.

SAN JOSE — A federal judge signaled Thursday that she might reduce Apple Inc.'s $1-billion jury award in its patent infringement case with Samsung Electronics Co.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh did not specify by how much she might shave the award, but during a marathon afternoon hearing in federal court in San Jose she said it did appear that the jury had miscalculated damages.

In August, after three days of deliberations in the complex patent case, a jury awarded Apple more than $1 billion.

In the months since the verdict, Samsung has mounted an aggressive campaign to overturn the verdict, raising a host of legal issues including juror misconduct. Apple hotly contested those issues during the hearing Thursday and sought to increase the damage award.

Lawyers for the world's two largest smartphone makers sparred for more than three hours over a bevy of legal issues in the dispute that produced one of the largest damage awards in an intellectual property case. Koh said she would issue rulings in the coming weeks.

Samsung argued that the damage award should be reduced because the jury incorrectly calculated the amount. Apple asked the court to award $535 million more in damages because the jury found that Samsung had willfully infringed Apple's patents.

Both sides seemed to be gearing up for years of legal appeals despite the judge's plea for "global peace." The case is likely to go before the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the Washington court that decides patent disputes, and perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court.

Apple also asked the judge to ban some Samsung products. The judge did not rule on whether the infringing Samsung products should be taken off store shelves.

The products are older models and would not dent Samsung sales, but the ban would give Apple a win in its high-stakes patent war against the South Korean company that is playing out around the globe.

ALSO:

NASA releases breathtaking images of the Earth at night

Samsung lawyers file copy of Apple patent settlement with HTC

Facebook voters: Everything you need to know to cast your ballot

jessica.guynn@latimes.com

Read More..

Oscar Niemeyer dies at 104; modernist Brazilian architect

Oscar Niemeyer, the architect whose soaring buildings form the heart of Brasilia, the instant modernist capital built in the wilds of Brazil in the late 1950s, has died. He was 104.

Niemeyer, who had outlived his contemporaries to become the world's oldest practicing architect of international stature, died Wednesday at a Rio de Janeiro hospital. The cause was a respiratory infection, a hospital spokeswoman told the Associated Press.

During his long and productive life, Niemeyer was revered as well as ridiculed for his daring designs, but the creativity and sheer volume of his works ultimately spoke for him. In 1988, at 80, he shared architecture's biggest prize, the Pritzker.

Niemeyer, a diminutive, soft-spoken man, worked well into his 90s in a Rio de Janeiro penthouse office with a stunning view of Sugar Loaf Mountain and overlooking Copacabana Beach. Hundreds of projects came into being kindled by this view.

Many of his designs began with a quick sketch that embodied his love of the curve — from Einstein's universe, to the sinewy white beach that he gazed at nearly every day, to the voluptuous women he so loved to watch walking along that beach.

These women, he often said, were his inspiration.

"Curves are the essence of my work because they are the essence of Brazil, pure and simple," Niemeyer told the Washington Post in 2002. "I am a Brazilian before I am an architect. I cannot separate the two."

A passionate man, he lived in protest of the right angle "and buildings designed with the ruler and the square." His politics were also those of protest — he became a communist in the 1940s because of his anger over the inequality he saw around him, and he was a longtime friend of Cuba's revolutionary, Fidel Castro. His designs — especially of Brasilia — were partly an attempt to push his country toward egalitarianism, bringing rich and poor together through housing projects and public spaces.

A few years after Brasilia was completed, when a rightist military coup in 1964 not only destroyed Niemeyer's dreams of a just society in Brazil but also took away his sponsors, he fled to Algiers and then Paris. In the city, he had an office on the Champs Elysees and met Pablo Picasso, Jean-Paul Sartre and many other notables and, he later recounted, lived a hedonistic life far away from his wife, Annita. He returned to Rio in the late 1970s.

Oscar Ribeiro de Almeida de Niemeyer Soares was a Carioca — a native of Rio — whose heritage was Portuguese, Arab and German. Born Dec. 15, 1907, he was the son of a businessman and his wife who lived in Laranjeiras, a quaint, hilly neighborhood within the city.

While at the National School of Fine Arts, from which he graduated in 1934, Niemeyer worked with architect and urban planner Lucio Costa, who would lead Niemeyer to projects that would make his name in international architecture.

Costa, the master planner of Brasilia and an early proponent of Brazilian modernism, at first was unimpressed when the young draftsman joined his firm. Before long, they were working with Swiss-born architect Le Corbusier — who was in Brazil as a design consultant to the government — on the defiantly modern design for the Ministry of Education and Health Building in Rio. The building, which incorporated Le Corbusier's signature "brise-soleil" louvers to shield it from Brazil's intense sunlight, became a symbol of the new architecture in Brazil.

Le Corbusier would greatly influence Niemeyer, instilling in him a sense of fluidity, spontaneity and what David Underwood, writing in "Oscar Niemeyer and Brazilian Free-form Modernism" (1994), called jeito — "the lightness of touch, the graceful elegance of form and the movement inherent in the sauntering 'Girl from Ipanema' celebrated in the best of Brazilian modernism."

While Le Corbusier opened doors to creativity, however, Niemeyer saw his work as very distinct from his mentor's. As he told The Times: "He posited the right angle. I posit the curve."

In bringing to life his sensuous designs, he relied on what was then a new and versatile material — reinforced concrete — which he pushed to its limits, especially at load-bearing points, he wrote in a 2003 essay for Deutsches Architektur Museum, "which I wanted to be as delicate as possible so that it would seem as if [they] barely touched the ground."

The first Niemeyer structure built was a maternity clinic in Rio in 1937. His first major project, commissioned in 1940, were buildings for Pampulha, a then-new suburb of the southeastern city of Belo Horizonte, including a yacht club, casino and a church so avant-garde in design that church officials refused to consecrate it for 16 years.

With Costa, Niemeyer also designed the Brazilian Pavilion at the New York World's Fair in 1939, and Niemeyer influenced the ultimate design of the United Nations headquarters while serving as Brazil's design consultant in 1947.

In time, his portfolio would include a postwar housing project in Berlin; the universities of Constantine and Algiers in Algeria; the French Communist Party headquarters in Paris; the Cultural Center of Le Havre, France; and the Mondadori headquarters in Milan.

He also designed the Strick House in Santa Monica— thought to be his only residential commission in the United States.

He will perhaps be best remembered for Brasilia, the bold project launched by Brazilian President Juscelino Kubitschek in 1956 in an effort to unify his vast country and move it forward half a century in a mere five years.

Read More..