Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

<b><i>Online Extra:</b></i> Google, Microsoft Strike Patent Peace Deal

By Scott Graham
October 05, 2015

Microsoft Corp. and Google Inc. have buried the hatchet on five years of patent litigation.

The companies issued a joint statement on Sept. 30 announcing the conclusion of 20 cases being litigated in the United States and Europe. The agreement comes a week after a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision resolving one of their most prominent disputes.

'As part of the agreement, the companies will dismiss all pending patent infringement litigation between them, including cases related to Motorola Mobility,' Microsoft and Google said in a joint statement. 'Separately, Google and Microsoft have agreed to collaborate on certain patent matters and anticipate working together in other areas in the future to benefit our customers.'

Google and Microsoft joined Amazon, Netflix and others earlier this month in'announcing plans'for creating a 'next generation,' royalty-free streaming-media format. Google and Microsoft are also part of a group of technology companies that have'lobbied the European Union'on the rules for a unified patent court.

The two have been duking it out against each other in federal court in'Washington state'and Wisconsin, the'U.S. International Trade Commission, and'in Germany. Microsoft scored a big victory earlier this year when the Ninth Circuit'affirmed a $15 million judgment, agreeing that Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility had breached a promise to license WiFi and video-compression technology at fair and reasonable royalties. The Ninth Circuit's decision became final Sept. 24.

It was not immediately clear whether the licenses flow beyond Google and Motorola to Google's Android operating system partners. Microsoft is said to generate'billions in revenues from licensing to Android partners, and Android has been'behind much of the litigation'between Microsoft and Motorola.

'


Scott Graham'writes for'The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of'The Intellectual Property Strategist. He can be reached at'[email protected].

Microsoft Corp. and Google Inc. have buried the hatchet on five years of patent litigation.

The companies issued a joint statement on Sept. 30 announcing the conclusion of 20 cases being litigated in the United States and Europe. The agreement comes a week after a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision resolving one of their most prominent disputes.

'As part of the agreement, the companies will dismiss all pending patent infringement litigation between them, including cases related to Motorola Mobility,' Microsoft and Google said in a joint statement. 'Separately, Google and Microsoft have agreed to collaborate on certain patent matters and anticipate working together in other areas in the future to benefit our customers.'

Google and Microsoft joined Amazon, Netflix and others earlier this month in'announcing plans'for creating a 'next generation,' royalty-free streaming-media format. Google and Microsoft are also part of a group of technology companies that have'lobbied the European Union'on the rules for a unified patent court.

The two have been duking it out against each other in federal court in'Washington state'and Wisconsin, the'U.S. International Trade Commission, and'in Germany. Microsoft scored a big victory earlier this year when the Ninth Circuit'affirmed a $15 million judgment, agreeing that Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility had breached a promise to license WiFi and video-compression technology at fair and reasonable royalties. The Ninth Circuit's decision became final Sept. 24.

It was not immediately clear whether the licenses flow beyond Google and Motorola to Google's Android operating system partners. Microsoft is said to generate'billions in revenues from licensing to Android partners, and Android has been'behind much of the litigation'between Microsoft and Motorola.

'


Scott Graham'writes for'The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of'The Intellectual Property Strategist. He can be reached at'[email protected].

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.