Oracle changes legal strategy in IP claim against Google
Oracle has offered to drop its patent charges against Google and rely only on copyright infringement, if the court will hear the copyright complaints quickly. In a filing made January 17, Oracle lays out three proposals to move the case forward: Oracle initially asks that the court “sever and stay” the patent claims and set [...]
Despite ‘egregious’ theft of trade secrets, damages hard to prove
Pure Power Boot Camp v. Warrior Fitness Boot Camp, 2011 WL 4035751 (S.D. N.Y.) (Sept. 12, 2011) While working as a Wall Street trader, the plaintiff got inspired to start her own physical fitness studio, based on a military boot camp. She visited Fort Knox to research the design, and after investing substantial time and [...]
Is the ‘25% rule of thumb’ still alive and well?
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Uniloc v. Microsoft to “abolish” the 25% rule of thumb in patent litigation appears to be final and fatal, according to most authorities (including the BVWire). But were reports of the rule’s “death by Daubert” premature? “Despite this holding,” says attorney Andrew S. Dallmann (Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell), in [...]
Caught in the valuation crossfire, judges fire back with Rule 706 experts
It’s not unusual for a federal court to appoint a technical expert as an independent advisor pursuant to Rule 706 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. But now, in two high-pressure and high-profile legal settings, judges have taken the unusual step of appointing a 706 expert to testify specifically on valuation—in one case, to calculate [...]
Court warns Oracle/Google to follow ‘road map’ in calculating royalties under entire market value rule
Soon after Oracle filed claims that Google infringed its patented Java software in the Android system, the federal district court made a mistake: it let Oracle submit its expert damages report early. Instead of expediting trial preparation (and settlement), the expert’s report simply “overreached in multiple ways,” the court said, “compounding damages ever higher into [...]
LA Times offers a case study on how IP has little value if you aren’t ready to fight for it
Nothing illustrates how the value of IP thrives only when the IP rights owner has the willingness and wherewithal to protect those rights more than a case study of a small, undercapitalized inventor, as told in the LA Times. Larry Lockwood received patents in 1994 and 2001 covering e-commerce systems to market merchandise and services. To [...]
New case law collections in intellectual property and bankruptcy valuation
BVR Business Valuation & Bankruptcy Compendium The new BVR Business Valuation & Bankruptcy Compendium: Case Law and Analysis contains over 100 court case abstracts and full text opinions of bankruptcy cases involving a dispute over the value of a business. The compendium includes all precedent-setting cases in the United States over the last 15 years [...]
Litigators should pay particular attention to brand valuation in commercial cases
James Gregory (CoreBrand, LLC) wrote in BOARDMEMBER.com ten reasons why brand valuation is so significant in many lost profits, damages, dissenting shareholder, and other commercial law matters. Brand valuation: legitimizes investment provides an objective measure of effort creates accountability aligns leadership identifies growth opportunities predicts market shifts identifies competitive opportunity and advantage informs M&A or [...]
Google outlines legal strategy in Oracle expert challenge
BVLaw Alert has blogged a couple of times about Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc., on the Java code allegedly found in Android software and on Google strategy. Oracle hired Boston University professor Iain Cockburn—the extensively published academic—to calculate and prove the alleged damages. Our reading of Google’s pre-Daubert challenge filing indicates that they will attack his credentials. For [...]
Supreme Court affirms “clear and convincing” standard in i4i-Microsoft case
The legal battle that began some 8 years ago between i4i and Microsoft ended Monday, July 6th at the Supreme Court. In 2003 a federal jury awarded $290 million to i4i, finding that Microsoft’s versions of Word (its word processing application) had infringed i4i’s patent (Patent No. 5,787,449) relating to text manipulation software. i4i’s claim [...]
Share your thoughts..