Tech patents have become a huge commodity in America.
Why buy a patent? Well, you’ll be able to sue anybody who infringes it.
You could also license it, and use the technology it covers all you want.
With these lucrative possibilities in mind, tech companies typically buy patents in big bundles.
And these patent bundles can go for jaw-drawing amounts.
Patent brokerage firm IPOfferings has now provided a glimpse into exactly how much a company will buy for the right to somebody else’s invention.
7. Adaptix’s $100 million sale to Acacia Research
In January, Adaptix sold Acacia Research 230 patents covering 4G technology, according to IPOfferings.
The deal was Acacia’s first major move to buy its own patent rights, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time. Previously, Acacia partnered with universities and other organizations to help them enforce patents.
Acacia has been criticized as a “patent troll,” or a company that makes most of its money from licensing patents or filing patent lawsuits.
However, Acacia CEO Paul Ryan previously told BI that people who use that term are just “name calling.”
6. Fujifilm Corp.’s $105 million sale to Universal Display Corp.
Fujifilm sold 1,200 patents covering OLED (organic light-emitting diode) technology to Universal Display Corp. in July, according to IPOfferings.
OLEDs are used to make increasingly popular high-contrast, low-energy screens, Science Daily has reported.
5. Real Network’s $120 million sale to Intel
In January, Real Network sold 190 patents to Intel covering technology for media players, according to IPOfferings.
The deal also included 170 patent applications (patents that haven’t been approved) and some video streaming software, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time.
The patent acquisition built Intel’s portfolio for technology that allows streaming on smartphones and laptops, according to the Journal.
Last week, Verizon filed a patent for a set-top box that detects what you’re doing while you watch TV, and serves you advertising accordingly. Ew, weird, companies watching what I do while I consume content. Big brother! Chill, son.
“Methods and Systems for Presenting an Advertisement Associated with an Ambient Action of a User” describes a system by which a device captures information about what you’re doing while enjoying TV, movies, etc, and uses it to target advertising to you. Using a “a depth sensor, an image sensor, an audio sensor, and a thermal sensor” the system would be able to detect whether you’re fiddling with your phone, interacting with another person, as well as performing any of:
eating, exercising, laughing, reading, sleeping, talking, singing, humming, cleaning, and playing a musical instrument.
Now, this might seem kind of creepy, but there’s a few important points to remember before you freak out and sound the privacy alarm. First, companies like Facebook, Google, etc, are capturing all sorts of information about what you’re consuming online and using it to serve you targeted advertising. Second, any system like this would almost certainly require you to opt-in before peeking into your life. Besides, how many of these patents actually turn into products, anyway? [USPTO via Ars Technica via Betabeat]
TED.com is just about the best place to hang out online if you have a few minutes to kill.
That’s because it offers free recorded lectures given by brilliant people doing amazing things in areas including technology, entertainment, design, business, science, and global issues.
And what’s cool about it is the talks are tagged so if you’re in the mood for something inspiring or funny, for example, you can get just the kinds of videos to do the trick.
Here are a handful of insightful TED talks posted this year that every entrepreneur should check out.
Shawn Achor explains how to change your perception of reality to produce better work.
Psychologist Shawn Achor doubles as a comedian in this talk, during which he says the lens through which your brain views the world shapes your reality.
“And if we can change the lens not only can we change your happiness, but we can change every single educational and business outcome at the same time,” he says in this highly entertaining video.
Drew Curtis discusses how he defended his business from a patent troll.
When Fark.com was sued by a patent troll “…for the creation and distribution of news releases via email” alongside companies such as Yahoo, MSN, Reddit, AOL, and TechCrunch, the eight-person company stood its ground.
“I had hoped to team up with some of these larger companies and defend against this lawsuit but one by one they settled out of the case even though not one of these companies infringed on the patent,” says Drew Curtis, founder of Fark.
The reason? The average troll defense costs $2 million and takes 18 months if you win. He proves that little guys don’t have to let themselves get bullied with ! frivolou s lawsuits.
Julia Burstein gives 4 lessons in creativity.
In this inspiring talk, radio host and book author Julie Burstein gives voice to several interviews with remarkably talented people who found that creativity grows when you pay attention to the world around you, learn from challenges, push against the limits of what you can do as well as the hardest thing of all—embrace loss.”
“We have to stand in that space between what we see in the world and what we hope for, looking squarely at rejection, at heartbreak, at war, at death,” she says.
The federal court jury in the patent infringement lawsuit between Apple and Samsung has presented its verdict after deliberating for just 21 hours and 37 minutes following the three week trial. This particular case started with Apple’s lawsuit last April and now the jury’s decision is that Samsung did infringe on Apple’s ’381 bounceback patent with all 21 of its products in question. For the ’915 patent on pinch-and-zoom, the jury ruled all but three of the devices listed infringed, and more damningly, found that Samsung executives either knew or should have known their products infringed on the listed patents. The jury has also found against Samsung when it comes to Apple’s contours on the back of the iPhone and its home screen GUI. The Galaxy Tab, was found not to have infringed upon Apple’s iPad design patents. The bad news for Samsung continued however, as the jury decided that not only did it willfully infringe on five of the seven Apple patents, but also upheld their validity when it came to utility, design and trade dress.
The amount of the damages against Samsung is in:
$1,051,855,000.00 (see below). That’s less than half of the $2.5 billion it was seeking, but still more than enough to put an exclamation point on this victory for the team from Cupertino. The final number is $1,049,343,540, after the judge found an issue with how the jury applied damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE and Intercept. The jury also ruled that Apple did not infringe upon Samsung’s patents with the iPhone 3G and 3GS, and has awarded it zero dollars in damage. We’ll have more information for you as it become available.
Update: Both companies have released statements on the matter, with Apple stating via the New York Times the ruling sends a loud and clear message that “stealing isn’t right.” Samsung has its own viewpoint calling this “a loss for the American consumer” that will lead to fewer choices, less innovation and high prices. You can see both in their entirety after the break.
Apple v. Samsung jury finds Apple’s patents valid, awards it nearly $1.05 billion in damages originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 24 Aug 2012 18:44:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
The chart below is based on data that came out during the Samsung-Apple patent trial (via CNET). It suggests that if Apple had been on all carriers in the U.S. Android would not have become as popular as it did.
Alas, Apple was not on Verizon, Sprint, or T-Mobile. This gave Google an opportunity to win over new customers. Those customers are likely coming off their first Android contracts now. It will be interesting to see if they stick with Google, or if they decide to jump to the iPhone.
Dr. Augustine Fou is Digital Consigliere to marketing executives, advising them on digital strategy and Unified Marketing(tm). Dr Fou has over 17 years of in-the-trenches, hands-on experience, which enables him to provide objective, in-depth assessments of their current marketing programs and recommendations for improving business impact and ROI using digital insights.
- Netflix vs Blockbuster - Perfect example of an industry replaced by a more efficient version of itself
- Coke vs Pepsi vs Dr Pepper
- Marketing Costs Normalized to CPM Basis for Comparison
- 3G calling, no registration, and totally free
- AOL's Plan To Steal TV Ad Dollars Is Totally Working
- The Top Endorsement Earners In Each Sport
- Groupon launches Breadcrumb iPad app, vows to not be a typical POS
- HP Mini 311 Nvidia ION Netbook Hackintosh'ed
- Top Most Shared Category on Pinterest is ... Food and Drink
- #SESNY: Toward a Performance Mindset for All Advertising
- Tips for Marketers Selecting a Digital Agency
- Context Is Not King or Queen; It's Just Necessary
- 2013 New Year's Digital Marketing Resolutions
- The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Online Campaign Ratings and eGRPs
- Why You Should Banish the Net Promoter Score Immediately
- Digital Strategy To-MAY-to vs. To-MAH-to
- The Agency-Client Relationship is Forever Changed
- Targeting vs. Privacy - Who Will Win?
- Digital + Traditional = Unified Marketing
- May 2013 (47)
- April 2013 (70)
- March 2013 (114)
- February 2013 (89)
- January 2013 (136)
- December 2012 (96)
- November 2012 (130)
- October 2012 (147)
- September 2012 (94)
- August 2012 (92)
- July 2012 (112)
- June 2012 (71)
- May 2012 (82)
- April 2012 (80)
- March 2012 (122)
- February 2012 (114)
- January 2012 (129)
- December 2011 (60)
- November 2011 (54)
- October 2011 (29)
- September 2011 (17)
- August 2011 (30)
- July 2011 (18)
- June 2011 (19)
- May 2011 (23)
- April 2011 (23)
- March 2011 (52)
- February 2011 (69)
- January 2011 (108)
- December 2010 (82)
- November 2010 (67)
- October 2010 (68)
- September 2010 (44)
- August 2010 (101)
- July 2010 (61)
- June 2010 (28)
- May 2010 (28)
- April 2010 (26)
- March 2010 (33)
- February 2010 (21)
- January 2010 (12)
- December 2009 (4)
- November 2009 (2)
- October 2009 (14)
- September 2009 (6)
- August 2009 (19)
- July 2009 (34)
- June 2009 (11)
- May 2009 (4)
- April 2009 (6)
- March 2009 (13)
- February 2009 (32)
- January 2009 (25)
- December 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (1)
- June 2008 (1)
- November 2007 (1)