Google strikes cross-licensing agreement with Cisco
After striking a deal cross-licensing deal with Samsung in January and taking measures to insert patent provisions in its sale of Motorola last week, the tech giant is revealing a new deal with Cisco this week.
February 04, 2014 at 06:09 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Intellectual property law is frequently an area for technology super-powers to trade blows, but recently Google has taken a different tack with its patents, using them as an opportunity to cooperate with other major players. After striking a deal cross-licensing deal with Samsung in January and taking measures to insert patent provisions in its sale of Motorola last week, the tech giant is revealing a new deal with Cisco this week.
The pact will cover the patent portfolios of both companies, preventing either side from using them as the basis for a suit. While neither company is likely to sell patents to non-practicing entities, verbiage in the agreement protects both sides from suit in that case as well.
Both sides aim to benefit from this agreement by reducing the number of suits they could potentially file against one another while taking the teeth out of troll-like activity in the future.
“This is a better solution to the privateering that we are seeing,” said Allen Lo, Google's deputy general counsel in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
Just as with the deal it made with Samsung, the pertinent financials of the deals have not been revealed by either side. Lo also indicated that the cross-licensing strategy would be one that Google will pursue with other technology companies.
With patent troll activity increasingly rising in the U.S., approaches like this that make an explicit attempt to benefit two sides while weakening the arsenal of NPEs may become more common. This is happening in tandem with increasing focus on patent regulation at the federal level, as well as action from attorneys general in several states.
For more on patent law, check out these stories:
Intellectual property law is frequently an area for technology super-powers to trade blows, but recently
The pact will cover the patent portfolios of both companies, preventing either side from using them as the basis for a suit. While neither company is likely to sell patents to non-practicing entities, verbiage in the agreement protects both sides from suit in that case as well.
Both sides aim to benefit from this agreement by reducing the number of suits they could potentially file against one another while taking the teeth out of troll-like activity in the future.
“This is a better solution to the privateering that we are seeing,” said Allen Lo,
Just as with the deal it made with Samsung, the pertinent financials of the deals have not been revealed by either side. Lo also indicated that the cross-licensing strategy would be one that
With patent troll activity increasingly rising in the U.S., approaches like this that make an explicit attempt to benefit two sides while weakening the arsenal of NPEs may become more common. This is happening in tandem with increasing focus on patent regulation at the federal level, as well as action from attorneys general in several states.
For more on patent law, check out these stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250