16th Feb,10

Judge Gilstrap rejects SEP-based arguments to set aside jury infringement and damages verdict (Genband v. Metaswitch)

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 10/2/16Publication: Essential Patent Blog"At the same time that Judge Gilstrap recently entered his bench trial ruling that rejected Metaswitch’s standards-based equitable defenses (see our Oct. 2, 2016 post), he also entered an Order that rejected Metaswitch’s request to set aside a jury’s verdict that it infringed valid patent claims based on, among [...]

16th Dec,09

DOJ and FTC Call for Public Comments on Proposed Updates to Their IP Licensing Guidelines

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 9/12/16Publication: Mondaq"On August 12, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed update to their Antitrust Guidelines for Licensing of Intellectual Property (the Guidelines), and called for public comments. The Guidelines summarize the agencies' antitrust enforcement policies with respect to the licensing [...]

16th Jul,09

Judge Gilstrap rules that damages can be enhanced if SEPs subject to a FRAND commitment are willfully infringed (Coreless v. LG)

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 9/7/16Publication: Essential Patent Blog"Judge Gilstrap recently denied accused infringer LG’s motion for summary judgment that alleged standard essential patents (“SEPs”) were not willfully infringed, letting that issue go to the jury;  if the jury finds willful infringement, then the court may decide whether and to what extent to enhance damages based on such [...]

16th Jun,09

Four Key Changes to Antitrust Guidelines for Licensing of Intellectual Property – DOJ, FTC Invite Comments

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 9/6/16Publication: National Law Review"Mark September 26, 2016, on your calendar as the deadline to tell the DOJ and FTC what should be changed, or not, in the Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property. On August 12, 2016, the DOJ and FTC issued a proposed update to those Guidelines and set the September [...]

16th Jan,09

Judge Payne applies “”important evidentiary principle”” to preclude telling jury about end product price (Core Wireless v. LG)

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 9/1/16Publication: Essential Patent Blog"Judge Payne recently denied defendant LG’s motion to exclude damages expert testimony on alleged standard essential patents (SEPs) where LG challenged the experts opinion (1) because he did not start with a royalty-rate that is then adjusted  by applying Georgia-Pacific factors and (2) because he failed to apportion value to the patented [...]

16th May,08

Competition policy v IP: striking a balance is a tricky exercise

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 8/5/16Publication: LexologyConceptually, intellectual property rights (IPRs) and competition law appear to be at odds: the former grants temporary monopolies and the latter protects and encourages market competition. This potentially difficult relationship has been increasingly at the heart of competition policy. As innovation becomes more important to economic success, there [...]

15th Apr,08

An SEP licensing system with no rules has no future, says IEEE Standards Board executive

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 8/4/15Publication: IAMIn a wide-ranging interview, Konstantinos Karachalios, the managing director of the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA), has explained why he feels the changes made earlier this year to the IEEE-SA’s patent policy, were essential to the future stability of licensing worldwide. Speaking to the IAM blog Karachalios insisted: “This [...]

15th Mar,08

RAND Agreement Proving Powerful Limit on Patentee Action: Microsoft v. Motorola

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 8/3/15Publication: PatentlyOIn a well written decision, the 9th Circuit has affirmed the lower court ruling that Motorola/Google owes $14 million to Microsoft for failing to live-up to its RAND commitments. Although Motorola (now Google) committed several WiFi-essential patents to Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (RAND) licensing, it later demanded that Microsoft [...]

16th Jan,08

New Judicial Interpretation on Patent Infringement

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 8/1/16Publication: LexologyThe Supreme Court of China (SPC) has recently published a new judicial interpretation with regards to the applicability of relevant laws when patent infringement cases are handled, which took effect from April 1, 2016. It is a further development of SPC’s judicial interpretation on the trial of patent [...]

16th Jan,08

Some Ericsson Patent Terms Made To TCL Deemed Fair

2017-05-22T19:17:58+00:00By |

Published: 8/1/16Publication: Law360A California federal judge has ruled that some of the license terms Ericsson Inc. offered a Chinese mobile phone developer for standard-essential patents for wireless technology were fair and reasonable, narrowing the developer's claims in its suit alleging Ericsson overcharged it. [READ MORE]Read More

Go to Top