Why Cisco, Salesforce Joined Alliance to Protect Patent System
Eight top tech companies recently joined forces to form an alliance dedicated to balancing the patent system by improving patent quality and…
July 25, 2017 at 10:48 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Eight top tech companies recently joined forces to form an alliance dedicated to balancing the patent system by improving patent quality and reining in the impact of nonpracticing entities, often referred to as “patent trolls.”
Two in-house lawyers from member companies said the motivation to join stemmed from the desire for a strong patent system that protects inventions and investments made in innovation.
The High Tech Inventors Alliance, which was announced July 10, counts Amazon.com Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., Salesforce.com Inc., Google Inc., Intel Corp., Adobe Systems Inc., Dell Technologies Inc. and Oracle Corp. as members. Combined, these eight companies own more than 115,000 U.S. patents and spent over $62 billion on research and development last year.
“HTIA supports balanced reforms in the [U.S.] Patent and Trademark Office, the courts and Congress that address the root causes of these problems while advancing a patent system that promotes investment in new technologies and American jobs,” according to the group's website.
To root out low-quality patents, for instance, the alliance supports a requirement from the Patent Office that patent applications clearly and fully explain the technical problem being solved. The group also stands behind the inter partes review procedure, making patent litigation fair and efficient and applying fair damage awards and only allowing for enhanced damages for willful infringement in the “most egregious circumstances.”
At Cisco, billions of dollars have been poured into research and development and hundreds of millions of dollars spent in creating the networking technology company's patent portfolio, so a strong patent system is critical, said Mark Chandler, senior vice president, general counsel and chief compliance officer at Cisco.
“For us, having a strong, efficient patent system is really critical for the innovation that we undertake. A strong patent system allows us to protect our inventions and allows us to earn a proper return on our investment in innovation,” Chandler explained. “At the same time, a strong patent system protects against patents being issued for claimed inventions that don't really reflect [patentability standards].”
Chandler said that even though a handful of Cisco's more than 10,000 U.S. patents have been deemed invalid through the IPR procedure, he believes the process strengthens the patent system. “Everybody says they are in favor of patent quality, but nobody wants their lousy patents invalidated,” he said. The IPR process “allows the Patent Office to go back and weed out” bad patents, he added, which is “really critical to protecting the quality of the patent system.”
For David Simon, senior vice president of intellectual property at Salesforce, the decision to join the alliance came from the desire for an organization that is very nimble in terms of being able to quickly push for reform or make decisions on where there's room for improvement. He said Salesforce saw a need for an organization that could respond “much more quickly” than so-called big tent organizations that represent more than just tech companies.
“These are all really important issues for us and we want to make sure that we continue working on this,” according to Simon. “We want to make sure that we continue to move forward in a good direction.”
Asked whether he sees the alliance as primarily beneficial to larger companies, and not necessarily the smaller players using the patent system, Simon said no. He pointed to the membership of the United for Patent Reform coalition, which, along with Salesforce, counts giants from Facebook Inc. to mom-and-pop businesses as members. No matter the size, these are companies that have been “hit by [patent] troll lawsuits,” Simon explained. “So this is not just an issue for large companies, this is an issue for companies of all sizes,” he said.
Contact Jennifer Williams-Alvarez at [email protected].
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
© 2024 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 AllSenators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anticompetitive Practices, Fees
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-68
- 2Friday Newspaper
- 3Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 4Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 5NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
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