In the highly contentious world of SEP licensing, one of the biggest debates in recent years has been between advocates of compulsory “access to all” and the existing “license to all” Regimes.

Is this what awaits? Last year, I described the broad negative and anticompetitive consequences of the IEEE’s 2015 patent policy, and was pleased to see the U.S. Department of Justice’s important 2020 Business Review Letter to IEEE (“DOJ BRL”) cite to my empirical work (see FN 47).

I find it fascinating that lawyers and other lobbyists involved with SEPs get so worked up in their policy preferences that they start to have blinders that automatically insert their preferences into texts where those preferences are no where to be seen.

After a bench trial, the Eastern District of Virginia found Cisco to be have willfully infringed patents owned by Centripetal Networks Inc., a small operating company, and awarded a judgment of $1.9 billion dollars.

Earlier this month the U.S. Department of Justice issued an updated Business Review Letter (BRL) for the IEEE patent policy.

David L. Cohen has been named as a world-leading IP strategist in the 2020 edition of the IAM Strategy 300

Trade secret protection has become an increasingly important part of the arsenal of protections available for a company’s intellectual assets.

This week the Department of Justice issued a business review letter (BRL) relating to Avanci’s proposed 5G licensing platform for patents declared as potentially essential owned by its globally diverse thirty eight licensors.

It seems that Unified Patent’s year plus PR campaign (see) against HEVC assets in the US has run out of steam. Tags: Standard essential patents; FRAND; IPR;;

As I have documented elsewhere, Apple, for quite a long time has been engaged in a sophisticated long-term quest to devalue (p7) standard essential patents (“Essential Patents”).