Since we started tracking the brokered patent market in 2012, we have seen more than $38 billion worth of patent assets offered on the market. As market information becomes more accessible, more companies participate and close deals.

Stakeholders across the IP community are keen to increase diversity in their ranks but, as Suzanne Harrison and Erik Oliver explain, even the most sophisticated companies face a challenge in building a full picture of precisely who is participating in the patenting process.

The IAM Strategy 300 Global Leaders guide draws from the worlds of private practice, consulting and other service providers, with specialists from the major IP markets in the America’s, Europe and Asia. Together they boast a wide range of expertise in IP-intensive sectors such as high-tech and life sciences.

After 10 years analysing the patent market, we have some very direct advice this year. If you are in-house counsel, to borrow a line from Samuel L Jackson: “Hold onto your butts.” These next few years are going to be tough.

Ken Seddon, CEO of LOT Network, Nigel Swycher, CEO of Cipher, and Kent Richardson, Partner at Richardson Oliver Law Group, provide an overview into the impact PAE’s can have and how LOT Network can help.

Five years since IAM Market was launched, analysis by Hannes Forssberg Malm and Erik Oliver of Richardson Oliver Insights shows that assets listed on the platform have been put to good use by those who acquire them.

What do IBM, Continental and Olympus all have in Common? They've all taken steps to maximize the value of their patents, they've reduced the risk of PAE litigation and they joined the LOT Network in 2020.

Richardson Oliver Law Group, Cipher, and LOT Network have just launched a report that discusses the 2.7 million assets under the LOT protection umbrella that companies like IBM and Continental have opted into.

The confusion around how to answer when someone asks the going rate for a patent in part stems from the common use of “price” and “value”nearly interchangeably in day-to-day conversations.

Just how much device makers are on the hook for in patent licensing payouts is one of the most debated questions in the IP community. While a complete answer may remain elusive, an analytical approach can help manufacturers assess their risk.

Late last year, Intel resurfaced the sale of a connected devices patent portfolio that was sidelined during the $1 billion sale of the majority of their smartphone modem assets to Apple (which included a pile of cellular wireless related patents).

The Economist cites Richardson Oliver in their article about curbs on frivolous patent claims potentially encouraging infringement.

The US Supreme Court’s Alice decision was predicted to have a significant impact on the deals market, but the results were not what we expected.

The current issue of IAM carries the latest annual survey on the brokered patent deals market from the team at Richardson Oliver Insights.

Since average price per patent was the “worst thing that has ever happened to patents”, we are pleased to introduce the new worst thing ever.

In addition to licensing or litigating patent rights, universities have the option to sell their patents outright to third parties. In this chapter, we explore the extent to which universities and other nonprofit research institutes currently participate in the secondary market for patents.

IAM recently covered AT&T's increased activity in the secondary patent market, with Lyft, Uber and Facebook among the companies that have purchased its assets. The telecoms giant has a significant portfolio - in terms of volume and quality - which has attracted a number of businesses looking to bolster their own holdings.

Occasionally, we hear people say, “brokered patents are all junk.” This begs the question, “are operating companies and non-practicing entities (NPEs) spending hundreds of millions of dollars buying junk patents?” Luckily, the short answer is no.

Alphabet Inc.'s Google has sold patents for the first time in the domestic brokered patent market, according to data provided to Bloomberg Law by Richardson Oliver Law Group LLP.

Tim Freestone explores why the growth in intellectual property and patent risks has not been matched by a corresponding growth in insurance.

Yesterday the United States Supreme Court issued decisions in both Oil States v. Green Energy and SAS Institute v. Iancu. In Oil States the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of inter partes review (see here, here and here). In SAS Institute, a 5-4 majority ruled that there is no authorization in the statute for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to partially institute a petition for inter partes review. Thus, the Supreme Court held that when the Patent Office institutes an inter partes review it must decide the patentability of all of the claims the petitioner has challenged.