In each 10-Q and 10-K, Apple describes contingencies and risks that may have a material impact on financial results.  Some of these relate to intellectual property.  The 10-Q for the just reported quarter was primarily notable for mention of the Nortel porfolio acquisition.

Contingencies

The contingencies section was updated last quarter to reflect the recent Apple "win" in the Mirror Worlds case. The content is carried over this quarter:

On March 14, 2008, Mirror Worlds, LLC filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on three patents covering technology used to display files. On October 1, 2010, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $208 million per patent for each of the three patents asserted. On April 4, 2011, the Judge overturned the verdict in the Company’s favor. Mirror Worlds has appealed the ruling. The Company had not recorded a loss contingency for this action.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations

In this section, Apple discloses the amount of its contribution to the Nortel portfolio purchase:

On June 27, 2011, the Company, as part of a consortium, participated in the acquisition of Nortel’s patent portfolio for an overall purchase price of $4.5 billion, of which the Company’s contribution will be approximately $2.6 billion. This asset acquisition is subject to approval by various regulatory agencies.

Indemnifications

The Company generally does not indemnify end-users of its operating system and application software against legal claims that the software infringes third-party intellectual property rights. Other agreements entered into by the Company sometimes include indemnification provisions under which the Company could be subject to costs and/or damages in the event of an infringement claim against the Company or an indemnified third-party. However, the Company has not been required to make any significant payments resulting from such an infringement claim asserted against it or an indemnified third-party. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss with respect to indemnification of end-users of its operating system or application software for infringement of third-party intellectual property rights. The Company did not record a liability for infringement costs related to indemnification as of either June 25, 2011 or September 25, 2010.

Part II. Other Information / Item 1. Legal Proceedings / Item 1A. Risk Factors

Patent holding companies continue to receive mention as a risk:

The Company’s future results could be materially adversely affected if it is found to have infringed on intellectual property rights.

Technology companies, including many of the Company’s competitors, frequently enter into litigation based on allegations of patent infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. In addition, patent holding companies seek to monetize patents they have purchased or otherwise obtained. As the Company has grown, the intellectual property rights claims against it have increased and may continue to increase as it develops new products and technologies. In particular, with the introduction of iPhone and 3G enabled iPads, the Company began to compete with mobile communication and media device companies that hold significant patent portfolios, and the number of patent claims against the Company in that technological space has increased. The Company is vigorously defending infringement actions in courts in a number of U.S. jurisdictions and before the U.S. International Trade Commission, as well as internationally in Europe and Asia. The plaintiffs in these actions frequently seek injunctions and substantial damages.

 

Prior Coverage:

• Consortium Including Apple Buys Nortel Patents for $4.5B
• Apple 10-Q: IP-Related Disclosures

In each 10-Q and 10-K, Apple describes contingencies and risks that may have a material impact on financial results.  Some of these relate to intellectual property.  The 10-Q for the just reported quarter contained two minor updates to these sections:

Contingencies

The contingencies section is updated to reflect the recent Apple "win" in the Mirror Worlds case.  (Removed content in "[[ ]]."  Added content is underlined.)

On March 14, 2008, Mirror Worlds, LLC filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on three patents covering technology used to display files. On October 1, 2010, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $208 million per patent for each of the three patents asserted. [[The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss contingency at this time.]]  On April 4, 2011, the Judge overturned the verdict in the Company’s favor. The Company had not recorded a loss contingency for this action.

Part II. Other Information / Item 1. Legal Proceedings / Item 1A. Risk Factors

A subheading in the "Risk Factors" section is updated to reflect that being "found to have infringed" IP rights is the risk, not the infringement itself.   The content following the heading is otherwise unchanged. (Removed content in "[[ ]]."  Added content is underlined.)

The Company’s future results could be materially adversely affected if it [[has]] is found to have infringed on intellectual property rights.

Technology companies, including many of the Company’s competitors, frequently enter into litigation based on allegations of patent infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. In addition, patent holding companies seek to monetize patents they have purchased or otherwise obtained. As the Company has grown, the intellectual property rights claims against it have increased and may continue to increase as it develops new products and technologies. In particular, with the introduction of iPhone and 3G enabled iPads, the Company has begun to compete with mobile communication and media device companies that hold significant patent portfolios, and the number of patent claims against the Company in that technological space has increased. The Company is vigorously defending infringement actions in courts in a number of U.S. jurisdictions and before the U.S. International Trade Commission, as well as internationally in Europe and Asia. The plaintiffs in these actions frequently seek injunctions and substantial damages.

The Company’s products and technologies may not be able to withstand these or any other third-party claims regardless of the merits of the claim.

Regardless of the scope or validity of such patents or the merits of any patent claims by potential or actual litigants, the Company may have to engage in protracted litigation, enter into expensive license agreements or settlements, pay significant damage awards, and/or modify or even discontinue one or more of its products or technologies. Any of these events could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition and operating results.

In certain cases, the Company may consider the desirability of entering into licensing agreements, although no assurance can be given that such licenses can be obtained on acceptable terms or that litigation will not occur. These licenses may also significantly increase the Company’s operating expenses. If the Company is found to be infringing one or more patents, it may be required to pay substantial damages. If there is a temporary or permanent injunction prohibiting the Company from marketing or selling certain products or a successful claim of infringement against the Company requires it to pay royalties to a third party, the Company’s financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected, regardless of whether it can develop non-infringing technology.

While in management’s opinion the Company does not have a potential liability for damages or royalties from any known current legal proceedings or claims related to the infringement of patent or other intellectual property rights that would individually or in the aggregate materially adversely affect its financial condition and operating results, the results of such legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. Should the Company fail to prevail in any of the matters related to infringement of patent or other intellectual property rights of others or should several of these matters be resolved against the Company in the same reporting period, the Company’s financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected.

Other notable information from "Risk Factors":

If the Company is unable to continue to develop and sell innovative new products with attractive margins or if other companies infringe on the Company’s intellectual property, the Company’s ability to maintain a competitive advantage could be negatively affected and its financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected.

and:

The Company relies on third-party intellectual property and digital content, which may not be available to the Company on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Many of the Company’s products are designed to include third-party intellectual property, and in the future the Company may need to seek or renew licenses relating to various aspects of its products and business. Although the Company believes that, based on past experience and industry practice, such licenses generally could be obtained on reasonable terms, there is no assurance that the necessary licenses would be available on acceptable terms or at all. If the Company is unable to obtain or renew critical licenses on reasonable terms, the Company’s financial condition and operating results may be materially adversely affected.

[...]

A mixed day for Apple at the ITC.  From the WSJ:

The U.S. International Trade Commission elected Friday to review a patent-infringement complaint by Eastman Kodak Co. against Apple Inc. and Research in Motion Ltd., reversing a January recommendation from an ITC judge.

The ITC said it would review the initial patent ruling in its entirety. The complaint tries to determine whether Apple's iPhone and Research in Motion's BlackBerry violated Kodak's patents on technology to preview images.

The agency originally found Kodak's patents were invalid and hadn't been infringed. The Commission said Friday that one or more cease-and-desist orders may be issued upon further review of the case.

Such orders could keep Apple and RIM from importing or selling mobile devices with digital cameras in the U.S. A final decision is expected by May 23.

The news prompted shares of Kodak to surge 20% in after-hours trading to $4.07, adding on to Friday's 8.6% gain in the regular trading session.

[...]

Even with today's 20% "surge," EK is still ~20% below its January 24 price of $5.22.

A settlement or licensing agreement before May 23 would not surprise me.

From Bloomberg:

Kodak used the ITC to gain $550 million from Samsung and $414 million from LG for allegedly infringing the same patent as in the Apple and RIM cases.

and:

Kodak, a 131-year-old company that popularized photography with the Brownie and Instamatic cameras, generated $838 million from patents last year. The company has told investors it expects to average $250 million to $350 million in annual revenue from intellectual property licensing through 2013. That figure doesn’t include potential Apple and RIM royalties.

EK's current market cap is only ~ $842M.  During the financial crisis, it dropped to barely above $600M.  The $683M operating loss for 2010 and negative $1B book value make an overall acquisition far less attractive, but at some point, I won't be surprised to see the IP hit the market to cover the wind down of the rest of the failing business.

While this could be make or break for Kodak, Apple generated $9.8B in cash flow from operations last quarter alone.