From the press release:

TORONTO, ONTARIO, Jun 30, 2011 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Nortel(1) Networks Corporation NRTLQ +19.05%  announced today that it, its subsidiary Nortel Networks Limited (NNL), and certain of its other subsidiaries, including Nortel Networks Inc. and Nortel Networks UK Limited (in administration), have concluded a successful auction of all of Nortel's remaining patents and patent applications. After a multi-day auction, a consortium emerged as the winning bidder with a cash purchase price of US$4.5 billion. The consortium consists of Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, Research In Motion and Sony.

The sale includes more than 6,000 patents and patent applications spanning wireless, wireless 4G, data networking, optical, voice, internet, service provider, semiconductors and other patents. The extensive patent portfolio touches nearly every aspect of telecommunications and additional markets as well, including Internet search and social networking. ...

Patents make strange bedfellows. That is a staggering amount of money, $750M average per member.

As an Apple shareholder, I am pleased that this large portfolio should not serve as a threat to Apple's business. This is balanced by disappointment, though, that a non-trivial portion of Apple's profits went to Nortel's creditors instead of Apple's shareholders.

I am already seeing the curiously predictable drumbeat of complaints that Google did not "protect Android" by buying the portfolio. While I will usually be one of the last people to defend Google, there are a few things to remember:

• The people criticizing Google have certainly not reviewed Nortel's portfolio to assess whether it would have been a good investment at this price level. At $4.5B, it's far from certain. Google's duty is to its shareholders. Calculated decisions will need to be made as to how "protecting" Android partners and developers serves the shareholders.
• $4.5B pays a lot of licensing fees against more specific threats.
• Patents grant the right to exclude others from doing things, not the right to do something. Patents are little defense against NPEs with no operating business to counterattack.
• Apple outshining Google in its support of its ecosystem is not news. It's corporate culture. (See also: music licensing)

 

New target date is June 30.

The US International Trade Commission announced today a one week extension of the target date in the review of Chief ALJ Luckern's Final Initial Determination in investigation 337-703.

Kodak filed its complaint against Apple and RIM with the ITC on January 14, 2010. The ITC issued a Notice of Investigation on February 17, 2010. The investigation centered around claim 15 of Kodak's US Patent 6,292,218 and its applicability to Apple's iPhone 3G, 3GS, and 4, and a variety of RIM devices.

Chief ALJ Luckern's Final Initial Determination was issued January 24, 2011 with a finding that claim 15 is invalid as obvious, and with findings of non-infringement for all of the accused Apple and RIM devices.

To "win," Kodak will need the full commission to reverse both the invalidity -and- non-infringement findings from the Final ID. Reversal of the invalidity finding would require successful challenges to multiple invalidating combinations of art. Reversal of the non-infringement findings would require modification of the Chief ALJ's constructions of multiple claim terms.

Kodak CEO Antonio Perez set expectations of revenue from Apple and RIM similar to the nearly $1B extracted from LG and Samsung when Kodak settled the separate 337-663 investigation.

 

Related Posts:

• Apple v. Kodak @ ITC: Initial Determination
• Kodak v. Apple @ ITC: Extended by a Month
• Kodak Was Granted Full Commission Review by 5-1 Vote
• Kodak v. Apple at the ITC: What Happens Now?
• Tangled Procedural Webs of the ITC and the USPTO
• RGB, YCC, and the importance of claim drafting
• Kodak v. Apple at the ITC: What's This About?
• Kodak enlists New York politicos in ITC dispute with Apple
• WSJ: ITC Revives Kodak Hopes in Apple, RIM Patent Case
• PowerCD & Quicktake: Apple and Kodak, in happier days together
• Bloomberg: Kodak Says $1B at Stake in Apple, RIM Patent Dispute

The USITC announced on Friday, May 13, 2011 that it will institute an investigation based upon Ogma, LLC's complaint of infringement of its '947 sound effects and '427 screen aspect ratio patents against over thirty entities.

It appears that Apple was dropped as a respondent in the unpublished April 26, 2011 amended complaint, as it does not appear in the announcement of the investigation.  Seiko Epson, Epson, HTC, Motorola Mobility, Sanyo and Sharp also have disappeared.

Even with Apple no longer involved, I may still check in on this investigation periodically to see how the '427 fares against the prior art.  I suspect it will not do well.  The ITC case should also provide useful guidance for Apple in the still pending cases (2-11-cv-00166 and 2-11-cv-00168) in Marshall, TX, if Apple remains as a defendant.  Joint Motions to Dismiss the '947 cases against Motorola Mobility and RIM have already been filed and granted.

 

Previous Coverage:

• Ogma v. Apple: A Prior Art Odyssey
• Ogma v. Apple: Disturbing "Aspects" of the Patent System
• Ogma v. Apple @ ITC

Of most interest is that the press release describes not just a license to practice the inventions in IV's patent portfolio (i.e., not get sued for infringement by IV), but also the ability to "borrow" the patents for use against competitors:

Becoming an IV licensee provides access to additional products and services to address both short-term and long-term IP-related matters. As an IV customer, RIM can now complement its own strong patent portfolio with access to IV’s portfolio and can leverage IV’s portfolio in its future licensing negotiations.

Source: Intellectual Ventures