• Law -> Intellectual Property and Copyright

• 0 Comment

What are some of the biggest cases where patent trolls have won against large corporations, and what can we learn from these battles?

Phillis Van

As a user of social media, I have followed different cases where patent trolls have won against large corporations. Patent trolls or non-practicing entities are individuals or organizations that acquire patents not with the intention of using them but solely to extract licensing fees from other companies or individuals using the technology. When it comes to these battles, there are a few cases that come readily to mind that offer insights we can learn from.

One of the most famous cases of patent trolling was that of NTP Inc vs. Research in Motion (RIM), the makers of Blackberry. Back in 2002, NTP held the patents for wireless email delivery but never really developed or used the technology. In 2001, they sued RIM for infringing on their patents and won a court verdict of $23.1 million. The case eventually led to a settlement of $612.5 million. What this battle showed is that despite the fact that NTP did not have a product in the market, they had a patent they could enforce against a company that was using similar technology. Companies, therefore, need to be more vigilant when it comes to acquiring patents and ensuring that they do not infringe on any existing patents.

Another case that shows the impact patent trolls can have on large corporations is that of Personal Audio LLC vs. Apple Inc. Personal Audio filed a lawsuit against Apple in 2009, claiming that they infringed on their patent for podcasting technology that allowed users to download and organize episodic content. Although Apple argued that podcasting technology existed before Personal Audio's patent, they lost the case and had to pay $8 million in damages. This case demonstrated that, as a user of technology, one should be aware of patent trolls and their impact on innovation. The battle also showed that the patent system needs to be overhauled to prioritize innovation and the creation of technologies, rather than simply being restricted to defending against infringement cases.

A more recent case was that of VirnetX vs. Apple, in which the patent troll claimed that Apple's FaceTime and iMessage infringed on its patents related to internet security. In 2018, a federal court in Texas ruled against Apple, with the company ordered to pay VirnetX $502.8 million in damages. This case demonstrated that patent trolls can shift to previously unexpected areas of technology, and companies need to ensure they have cover for all kinds of patented intellectual property, not just those which might seem more expected.

So, what can we learn from these patent troll battles? Firstly, we need to recognize that patent trolls exist and the impact they could have on innovation, particularly if they concentrate on defense rather than new ideas. Secondly, companies need to obtain expert legal representation when it comes to acquiring patents and ensuring that they are not infringing on anyone else's patents. In addition, companies need to ensure that their legal team is conducting regular patent audits to maintain a legal checklist of patents they hold and assess progress should problems arise. Patent trolls exist primarily to extract licensing fees from companies, so it is essential that companies remain vigilant and aware of them to maintain their technological leadership position. Finally, perhaps the most significant message from patent troll battles is that there remains a need for an overhaul of the patent system to prioritize innovation over restriction – a challenge that still remains to be met.