Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
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.
'
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,'
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.
It was not immediately clear whether the licenses flow beyond
'
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
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 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.
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.