Posts

Meet the IP Thought Leaders: Eric Stasik

Meet the IP Thought Leaders: Eric Stasik by David L. CohenI first met Eric Stasik some 5 years ago when I was at Vringo. When we first met, it took no more than 10 minutes to appreciate how lucky I was to have him on my team. Eric has an uncanny ability to, very quickly, see through can’t and cut to the core issues at hand. More importantly, he finds solutions. Eric gets stuff done quickly, effectively, and cost efficiently.  Having seen him at work in the years since, my appreciation of Eric and what he brings to the table has only deepened.

Eric currently provides assistance and guidance to firms engaged in commercial patent license negotiations through his consultancy, Avvika AB.  I am honored he agreed to this interview.
Read more

When Vringo Met China’s NDRC

When Vringo Met China's NDRC by David L. CohenIntellectual Asset Management Magazine (IAM) today published a short excerpt of my and Doug Clark’s forthcoming, longer piece on China’s anti-monopoly law (AML) and how it has been applied to standard essential patents (SEPs).   The published excerpt concerns China’s National Development and Reform Commission’s (NDRC) investigation of Vringo undertaken at the behest of ZTE.  The piece focuses on two hair-raising meetings I had with NDRC officials in Beijing where all manner of explicit and implicit threats to my life, liberty, and property were made.  Read more

A Short History of Vringo’s Battle with ZTE

A Short History of Vringo’s Battle with ZTEThis paper was originally written as a source material for my presentation at the ABA’s 2017 IP West as part of the The China Paradox – October 11-12, 2017, Long Beach, CA, and subsequently edited and supplemented.

I.                The Vringo Background

The following paper is a short history of the thirty-nine-month battle between Vringo, Inc. and ZTE Corporation. Vringo (now called FORM Holdings) was a technology company that became involved in the worldwide patent wars.[1] The company won a 2012 intellectual property lawsuit against Google, in which a U.S. District Court ordered Google to pay 1.36 percent of U.S. AdWords sales. Analysts estimated Vingo’s judgment against Google to be worth over $1 billion.[2] The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the District Court’s ruling on appeal in August 2014 in a split 2-1 decision,[3] which Intellectual Asset Magazine called “the most troubling case of 2014.”[4] Vingo also pursued worldwide litigation against ZTE Corporation in twelve countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Malaysia, India, Spain, Netherlands, Romania, China, Malaysia, Brazil and the United States.[5] The high profile nature of the intellectual property suits filed by the firm against large corporations known for anti-patent tendencies has led some commentators to refer to the firm as a patent vulture or patent troll.[6] Read more