//
archives

AOL

This tag is associated with 13 posts

Google Lawsuit Reveals Patent Monetization Strategies Of BT And Goldman Sachs

Suffolk Technologies, a Delaware LLC, accused AOL and Google of infringing patents–including US Patent 6,081,835–through the use of Google AdWords and AdSense.  A lawsuit filed in June 2012 explained that the patents originated at British Telecom (BT), and a series of simultaneously recorded assignments shows the patents subsequently assigned to IPValue and then Suffolk.  According to an … Continue reading

Augme Patent Case To Be Set For Trial – Board Member Don Stout Credits Patent Licensing As Key To Advancing Young Operating Companies

Augme Technologies‘ 2007 lawsuit against AOL may finally go to trial after a nearly five-year delay.  Last week, Judge Colleen McMahon of New York’s Southern District ordered Augme Technologies and AOL, opposing parties in a 2007 patent infringement lawsuit, to advise the court of anything the parties need prior issuing a Joint Pre-Trial Order–a key … Continue reading

Patent Pricing ‘A La Carte’ Drives AOL Valuation

Over at the IAM Blog, as well as Gametime IP, MDB Captial received some undeserved credit for correctly calling AOL’s patent portfolio value at $1 B, while another firm–kept busy by actually driving the deal–went unnoticed.  Unfortunately, limelight-seekers–with no dog in the hunt–commonly take to the airwaves, while the real analysts actually driving the deal … Continue reading

Mark Cuban Backs Patent Owner Innovate/Protect In Lawsuit With Google

Every technology company I have is getting hit by patent lawsuits that are the biggest bunch of bullshit ever. … I’m talking about companies that have been doing business the same way for years that are getting hit by patent trolls . These aren’t operating companies that are trying to protect their business. These are … Continue reading

Q: Why Was MDB Capital Right, And M-CAM So Very, Very Wrong On AOL Patent Value?

A: Because computers are not capable of truly understanding patents. Period. Joff Wild over at the IAM Blog explained M-CAM’s $290 M prediction as the “absolute ceiling price” of the AOL patent sale quite succinctly (and politely) by noting that the computer analytics firm “seems to have got it horribly wrong.”  Meanwhile, MDB Capital’s Christopher Marlett prediction … Continue reading

Well, That Didn’t Take Long

So, less than 24 hours after I wrote that “sometimes the day is not complete without a column … about how our patent system is malfunctioning and not performing its goal of ‘promoting innovation,’” we have this insipid entry from the Wall Street Journal and Andy Kessler.  The piece is a fairly predictable diatribe, but … Continue reading

Why I’m Not Writing An Article About The Yahoo! v Facebook Patent Case Yet

In case you haven’t heard, Yahoo! sued Facebook for infringement of ten of its patents.  Electronic court records have yet to be updated, but Yahoo! helpfully provided a copy of the complaint to the media, which is embedded below.  The complaint describes Yahoo! as an innovator and originator of technologies commonly in use by social … Continue reading

How Startups Should Plan For Patent Enforcement Costs

A few days ago, as covered on GametimeIP, a UK inventor Michael Wilcox burned his patent in protest over the failure of the patent system to provide realistic protection from appropriation of his invention by others.  While the inventor’s lament is a common one, the falsehood of the so-called “exclusive right” is so well known … Continue reading

Interval Licensing Defendants Fail To Identify Prior Art

Patents asserted against Google, AOL, Yahoo and several others were suggested to be “one of the most obvious things out there” according to certain pundits (evidently date stamped repositories of all technical knowledge).  On Wednesday we learned that, despite such protestations, proof of such obviousness was not as easily identified.  Having failed to identify satisfactory … Continue reading

Don’t Fear The Licensor — Infringement Validates Importance Of Patented Technology

Has one of Paul Allen’s former researchers defected?  Mike Masnick over at Techdirt directs us to comments from co-inventor Michael Naimark (of USP 6757682), claiming that he is “expressing concern about how much money is focused on litigation instead of innovation.” But what he is really saying might be more supportive of Paul Allen and … Continue reading