Tag

Patent Buying

“AT&T’s Portfolio is a Treasure Trove for Buyers.” Diakun. IAM Market (February 2019)

By | Publication | No Comments

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.  

“AT&T’s Portfolio is a Treasure Trove for Buyers.” Diakun. IAM Market (February 2019), available here.

“Brokered Patents Are Not Junk—and the Reasons Will Surprise You.” Ågren et. al. IPWatchdog (January 2019)

By | Publication | No Comments

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. We know clients have successfully bought and used brokered patents to substantially alter their licensing and litigation posture at a lower cost than the alternatives. We also know that patents on the brokered market rank higher than average patents (See “Finding the Best Patents — Forward Citation Analysis Still Wins”, by Oliver, et al.). So why this disconnect? We are victims of our own cognitive biases and the behavioral economic traps that make it harder for buyers to find and buy patents.

 “Brokered Patents Are Not Junk—and the Reasons Will Surprise You.” Ågren et. al. IPWatchdog (January 2019), here. 


“You Need Defensive Patents but You Don’t Have Any. Now What? A Case Study.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (August 2017)

By | Publication | No Comments

“You Need Defensive Patents but You Don’t Have Any. Now What? A Case Study.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (August 2017)

The setting is familiar: a large corporate asserter uses its patents against a smaller, high-growth company with no patents. Companies like Qualcomm, IBM, Nokia, and Microsoft regularly assert their patents. This case study describes how one of our clients included patent buying into their patent strategy to successfully defended against a corporate assertion by acquiring patents in the open market.

Also, available in our case studies here.

“Patent Sales Rates Decreased in 2016, but Patent Market Remains Viable and Robust.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (April 2017)

By | Publication | No Comments

In this fourth installment in the six-part series of the 2016 market report from IPWatchdog, the ROL Group team helps shed light on the market trends that patent buyers and sellers should keep in mind when evaluating patents.

“Patent Sales Rates Decreased in 2016, but Patent Market Remains Viable and Robust.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (April 2017), available here.

“Doing Patent Deals: Key Issues in a Challenging Environment.” Richardson. PLI – IP Monetization and Investment 2017 (April 2017)

By | Events | No Comments

ROL Group has compiled its data on the brokered patent market to help give a better understanding to associated risks of patents. We look at litigation, overall market trends and more to help you make informed decisions when buying or selling.

“Doing Patent Deals: Key Issues in a Challenging Environment.” Richardson. PLI – IP Monetization and Investment 2017 (April 2017), event details here.

Presentation slides available here.

“2016 Patent Market Report: Patent Prices and Key Diligence Data.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (April 2017)

By | Publication | No Comments

In this publication from IPWatchdog the ROL Group team takes a look at what patent buyers and sellers should expect from the current market. We offer comprehensive pricing analysis to determine whether your estimations for patents are in the ballpark.

“2016 Patent Market Report: Patent Prices and Key Diligence Data.” Richardson et. al. IPWatchdog (April 2017), available here.

“Inside the 2016 Brokered Patent Market.” Richardson et. al. IAM Magazine Vol 81 (January 2017)

By | Publication | No Comments

In our continuing series of annual publications on the activity in the secondary patent market, we see that the only constant is change. Although asking prices have stabilized, sales are down, bringing the value of the market down to $165 million from $233 million last year. However, the launch of both IAM Market and the Industry Patent Purchase Program (IP3) has introduced new transaction opportunities. At the same time, the impact of negative patent decisions is becoming apparent as non-practicing entities (NPEs) pull back from the market. For the first time, purchases by corporations have exceeded NPE purchases. Even the biggest NPEs have been affected, with RPX succeeding Intellectual Ventures (IV) as the new buying leader. Further, the data shows that the US Supreme Court’s decision in Alice has crushed much of the nascent financial technology (fintech) patent market and affected software package sales rates. Finally, we received better litigation data this year, and it appears that the litigation risk from sold patents is much higher than previously reported – you may want to reconsider your risk models and membership of defensive aggregators.

“Inside the 2016 Brokered Patent Market.” Richardson et. al. IAM Magazine Vol 81 (January 2017), available here PDF.

“Patent Purchases and Litigation Outcomes.” Lemley et. al. 2016 Patently-O Patent L.J. 15 (December 2016)

By | Featured, News | No Comments

The sales market for patent rights continues to vex analysts – especially in terms of valuation. In their Patently-O Patent Law Journal article, Professor Mark Lemley teams up with the Richardson Oliver Law Group to provide further guidance.  The article considers how patent litigation outcomes vary according to the identity of the patentee (ownership) and the manner in which the patent was obtained (source), read the article at Patently-O.

“Patent Purchases and Litigation Outcomes.” Lemley et. al. 2016 Patently-O Patent L.J. 15 (December 2016)