M·CAM

In the second half of 2011, the semiconductor company Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. (MIP) sent letters to multiple companies asserting infringement on four of MIP’s mobile application patents. In 2012, MIP started filing lawsuits against many of those companies. Meanwhile, other proactive entities are filing invalidation suits against MIP. This tangled mess has quickly become a Gordian knot in need of cutting, and the corporations attempting to invalidate MIP’s patents have started doing so.

In the global Battle Royale of Apple and Samsung at the International Trade Commission, Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender should receive an honorable mention as being the quirkiest judge. Referencing a scatological joke from a Cheech and Chong album , Judge Pender’s quote reflects the growing frustration of the courts with two multinational corporations who simply can’t play nice. However, what was meant as harmless commentary could overturn his decision.

On May 7th 2012 Unified Messaging Solutions LLC (UMS), a subsidiary of Acacia Research Group LLC, yelled “Pay me!” to the financial services industry. It claimed infringement of UMS-licensed patents on web-based messaging services by The Bank of New York Mellon, Morgan Stanley, American Express Company, and the Vanguard Group. As UMS is the exclusive licensee of the asserted patents, it is interesting to trace the tangled skein of ownership of the asserted intellectual properties. Has UMS simply been given a license to litigate?

When does a company become a troll?

On April 18, 2012, the U.S. International Trade Commission announced an investigation into a patent infringement complaint filed by patent licensor Pragmatus AV against ASUS, HTC, LG, Pantech, RIM and Samsung concerning mobile phones and tablets. The five patents in the complaint had been previously purchased and owned by Intellectual Ventures (“IV”). In addition, five of the six defendants have previously signed licensing agreements with IV.

On March 27, 2012, Graphics Properties Holdings, the remnant of Silicon Graphics Inc., launched a patent infringement suit against Apple, HTC, LG, RIM, Samsung, and Sony. Despite its non-operating status and troll-like activities, Graphics Properties does hold a decent patent portfolio (read: it’s not perfect, but they do hold early priority to widely used display technologies). What does this mean to these defendants, half of which are already suing each other over patent infringement?