Royalties

News & Analysis as of

Important royalty withholding tax decision

The taxpayer, Seven Network Limited, has won a recent decision (22 December 2014) in the Australian Federal Court, Seven Network Limited v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2014) FCA1411, which is significant to all...more

Energy Management Patent Triggers a Covered Business Method Review

Faced with a patent threat, renewable energy and climate change companies may have a new defense option – a Covered Business Method (CBM) proceeding. Ushered in less than 2 years ago as part of comprehensive patent reform...more

The Year Ahead in Patent Law - 2015

With the advent of the America Invents Act (AIA), public perception of frivolous patent litigation, frequently surrounding cases filed by non-practicing entities (NPEs), has received increasing legislative attention. Although...more

It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, FRAND World

Early Determinations of Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory License Payments Have Been Anything but Consistent - When an invention claimed in a patent is essential to complying with a technical operating standard...more

Bankruptcy Sales: “It Ain’t Over ’Til It’s Over”

Great Plains Royalty Corp. v. Earl Schwartz Co. (In re Great Plains Royalty Corp.), 520 B.R. 292 (Bankr. D. N.D. 2014) – Two companies that acquired assets in a bankruptcy auction moved to reopen the case to clarify...more

Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc. Guidance on Determining Damages for Standard Essential Patents

Patents claiming inventions which must be used to comply with certain technical standards (for example, the Wi-Fi standard or standards for 3G) are referred to as standards-essential patents or “SEPs”. There has,...more

DOI Proposes Overhaul Of Federal And Indian Mineral Lease Royalty Valuation Standards

On January 6, 2015, the Department of the Interior’s Office of Natural Resources Revenue (“ONRR”) issued a proposed regulation that would substantially modify existing regulations in 30 C.F.R. Part 1206 for the valuation for...more

IP Newsletter - January 2015

In This Issue: - Castle Defense: Federal Circuit Reinforces Patent Damages Gate in VirnetX - Standards Patent Licensing: Always Apportionment, Sometimes Stacking - Supreme Court to Consider Good-Faith...more

Daubert Challenge to Damage Expert Denied Where Contested Matters Were for Cross-Examination and Not Proper for Exclusion

In this patent infringement action, Apple challenged the opinions of the plaintiff's damage expert on several bases, including the determination of a royalty rate based on the price of third-party applications....more

Judge Hellerstein rules on a series of motions related to infringement contentions, motions to compel documents and responses to...

Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., et al. Case Number: 1:13-cv-03777-AKH - Judge Hellerstein resolved a number of discovery-related motions. First he found that defendants’ motion to strike...more

Supreme Court Corner: Q4 2014

KIMBLE V. MARVEL ENTERPRISES, INC. Patent Licensing - Cert. Pending - Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Brulotte v. Thys Co., which held “a patentee’s use of a royalty agreement that projects...more

Will the Supreme Court Remove Brulotte’s Shadow Over Patent Licensing?

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Although criticized by scholars, antitrust agencies, and the...more

The United States Supreme Court Holds That a Defendant’s Notice of Removal Need Only Include a “Plausible Allegation” That the...

On December 15, 2014, the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC, et al. v. Owens.1 Writing for the 5 – 4 majority, Justice Ginsberg held that a defendant’s notice of removal pursuant to...more

Changes To Iron Ore Royalties In Western Australia

On 28 November 2014, the Western Australian Government made changes to the manner by which iron ore royalties payable to the Government are calculated. These changes more clearly prescribe the scope of permissible deductions...more

Supreme Court 2014 Patent Preview

On average, the U.S. Supreme Court historically hears fewer than one patent case each term. For example, in the 14 years between 1982 and 1995, the Court decided only five patent cases. In the seven years between 1995 and...more

U.S. Supreme Court Eases CAFA Removals

Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, in response to perceived (in fact real) concerns regarding potential abuses of the class action process. Among CAFA’s important provisions was the right to remove...more

Supreme Court Opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719. Unsurprisingly, the Court held that a notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act does not need to...more

Supreme Court to Decide Whether License Agreements May Require Payment of Royalties After Patent Expiration

The U.S. Supreme Court Friday agreed to revisit a longstanding precedent that bars patent owners from collecting royalties after their patents have expired, even if those post-expiration payments represent compensation for...more

Supreme Court Decides Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens

On December 15, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719, holding that a notice of removal to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and the Class...more

Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - December 2014 (Global)

For this month’s Top Stories, we are republishing two very recent Orrick Client Alerts that address an important U.S. appellate decision regarding the extraterritorial application of U.S. antitrust laws and the first U.S....more

Standards Patent Licensing: Always Apportionment, Sometimes Stacking

What is a Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) royalty for a few patents essential to practicing a technical standard like WiFi and how should the jury in such a case be instructed on damages? The Federal Circuit...more

Fed. Circuit: No “Bright Line Rules” For Determining RAND Royalties; Rejects District Court Method of Computing RAND Royalty Rates

Courts in the last two years have grappled with what methodology to apply to determine a reasonable royalty rate for infringed patents subject to “Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory,” or “RAND,” encumbrances. On December 4,...more

Federal Circuit Provides Important Guidance in RAND Disputes

On Dec. 4, 2014, the Federal Circuit issued a much-anticipated opinion in Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., Nos. 2013-1625, -1631, -1632, -1633 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2014). The panel—consisting of Judges Kathleen O'Malley,...more

Focus on Pennsylvania Corporate Taxes

With the November 4th election of Democrat Tom Wolf as Pennsylvania’s next Governor, Pennsylvania corporate taxpayers face an interesting budget season in 2015. During the campaign, Wolf advocated for a severance or...more

Recent Developments Relating to Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Patent Assertion Entities, FRAND and Patent Misuse

On Thursday November 6, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced it had reached an agreement with MPHJ Technology Investments (MPHJ), a patent assertion entity, to settle the FTC’s Complaint that MPHJ allegedly made...more

137 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 6