1. Former Apple Chinese engineer Zhang Xiaolang argued that he is not guilty and is striving to implement bail!
According to foreign media reports, former Apple Chinese engineer Zhang Xiaolang was accused of stealing trade secrets of Apple's self-driving car project, but he said he was innocent in the federal court in San Jose, California, and on Monday (July) On the 16th, an appeal was filed by a lawyer.
Zhang Xiaolang's lawyer, Daniel Olmos, said after Monday's hearing that Zhang Xiaolang was granted bail by a US local judge with a bail of $300,000, and he is working hard to ensure that bail is implemented.
Jiwei.com reported that in December 2015, Zhang Xiaolang was hired by Apple to participate in the development of the 'Titan' project. His team was responsible for designing and testing the circuit board to analyze sensor data. In April this year, Zhang Xiaolang resigned from Apple and joined the domestic market. The startup company Xiaopeng Automobile. However, last week, a US criminal lawsuit alleged that Zhang Xiaolang was suspected of stealing the trade secrets of Apple's driverless cars before leaving the company and bringing the technology to Xiaopeng.
On Saturday (July 7), Zhang Xiaolang booked the last flight of Hainan Airlines to Beijing, China, but was finally arrested by law enforcement officers of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) when passing the security checkpoint at San Jose Airport.
According to the lawsuit, Zhang Xiaolang may face up to 10 years in prison and a fine of 250,000 US dollars due to allegedly stealing Apple's trade secrets.
The US prosecutor said that Zhang Xiaolang had admitted to the FBI that he downloaded Apple's driverless technical files to his wife's laptop for continued use.
In this regard, Xiaopeng Automobile has made official clarifications and announcements, and said that Zhang Xiaolang signed the intellectual property compliance document on the day of his initial employment in May. There is no record that he reported any sensitive and irregularities to Xiaopeng. In addition, when On June 27, the company was informed of the investigation of Zhang Xiaolang by relevant local authorities in the United States. Zhang Xiaolang’s computer and office supplies have been sealed in accordance with regulations, and will continue to actively cooperate with relevant investigations on this matter. (Proofreading/Sunset)
2. Li Keqiang: Strengthen intellectual property protection and severely punish malicious infringement of intellectual property units or individuals;
According to the micro-network news, the 20th China EU leaders meeting was held in Beijing on July 16th. Premier Li Keqiang met with the European Council President Tusk in the Great Hall of the People, and the European Commission President Juncker met with reporters and answered questions. Both China and the EU expressed their emphasis on intellectual property rights during this meeting, and pledged to strengthen intellectual property dialogue and jointly deepen intellectual property protection measures.
During the meeting, the two sides agreed to make China-EU investment agreement negotiations a top priority and strive to establish a fair and friendly business environment for Chinese and European investors. The two sides pledged to strengthen cooperation in intellectual property protection and deepen exchanges in the field of intellectual property.
This year marks the 15th anniversary of the establishment of a strategic partnership between China and the EU. China and the EU have made positive progress in cooperation in trade, investment, diplomacy, interconnection, climate change and other fields. Premier Li Keqiang said that the Chinese government attaches great importance to the protection of intellectual property rights. In the future, not only will law enforcement be strengthened, but the statutory compensation limit for intellectual property infringement will be greatly increased. Enterprises or individuals that fail to comply with the rules for repatriating intellectual property rights will be severely punished.
In the high-tech cooperation between Chinese and foreign companies, Li Keqiang said that China warmly welcomes foreign companies to cooperate with China in high-tech fields and will resolutely evict the market for violations of intellectual property rights. Li Keqiang has repeatedly stressed that China firmly resists forced transfer of knowledge. Property rights behavior, if any enterprise feels that it has been subjected to forced behavior, it can appeal to the Chinese side.
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang once said that China will strengthen intellectual property protection and implement a punitive punitive damages system. It must resolutely evict the market for violations of intellectual property rights. It has repeatedly indicated to reporters that foreign companies that invest in China are never allowed to be forced. Transfer of technology. (Proofreading / Sunset)
Originally wanted to harvest the entire industry, but unexpectedly the players in the industry 'groups'.
Recently, a request for invalidation initiated by Hisense and other companies for the invention of the method and equipment for decoding audio signals (patent number: 2008100034623) held by Guangzhou Guangsheng Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Hirose Corporation) The Patent Reexamination Board of the State Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Reexamination Board) made a review decision on the 'invalidation of the patent part'.
Up to now, the three audio-related patents held by Guangsheng Company have successively obtained the results of the patent invalidation procedure. Among them, one patent was invalidated and two patents were partially invalid.
The manufacturers that filed the invalidation request were Samsung, Hisense, Skyworth and a patent management company in the television industry. Among them, Samsung, Hisense and Skyworth, these three companies were sued by the company for patent infringement and accumulative claims of 400 million. The defendant of Yuan.
Now, with the results of the corresponding patent invalidation procedures, the corresponding patent infringement cases are expected to be accelerated. Among them, the patent infringement cases in which the patents involved have been invalidated have been rejected by the courts.
Total claims of 400 million yuan: Samsung, Skyworth and Hisense, were all brought to court
On July 4, 2017, Guangsheng Company sued Samsung (Tianjin Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.) and other parties to the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court for a total claim of more than 50 million yuan.
In July, 2017, due to alleged patent infringement, Guangsheng Company will be Skyworth Group Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Skyworth-RGB Electronics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as Skyworth), Gome Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. v. Beijing Intellectual Property Court, claiming more than 100 models Skyworth TV infringed on the two invention patents it held, and requested the court to order the three defendants to stop the infringement and compensate the economic losses and other reasonable expenses totaling 192.2 million yuan.
On the same day, it was suspected of patent infringement. Guangsheng Company sued Hisense (Hisense Group Co., Ltd., Qingdao Hisense Electric Co., Ltd.) and Shenzhen Suning Yunshang Sales Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Suning Company) to Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court.
It can be seen that at almost the same time, Hirose has successively filed Samsung, Skyworth and Hisense to the courts in Beijing, Guangzhou and Shenzhen, and filed high-value claims, totaling more than 400 million yuan.
It should be noted that in the series of patent infringement cases of Guangsheng Company v. Samsung, Skyworth and Hisense, the patents involved may include but are not limited to: 'audio decoding' (patent number: 2007101416616), 'audio encoding and decoding system' (patent No.: 2008100034642) and 'Methods and equipment for decoding audio signals'.
The public information shows that the relevant patent is the standard necessary patent of the Multi-channel Digital Audio Codec Technical Specification (GB/T 22726-2008) (hereinafter referred to as the DRA standard).
The company has suffered setbacks: one was invalidated and two were partially invalid.
According to the information from the website of the State Intellectual Property Office, as of July 15, 2018, the number of inventions submitted by Hirose Corporation was 17 and the number of inventions was 24, of which the majority of the company's patents were encoded with audio. And decoding technology related.
In addition, the company's official website information shows that the company has participated in the development of multiple domestic and international standards for audio coding and decoding.
Therefore, Hirose's technical or standard strength in the field of audio decoding and decoding is unquestionable, but this does not mean that the patents it holds must be ' impeccable'.
On February 27, 2018, the patent involved in the case was 'audio decoding', and the patent invalidation request filed by Samsung, the Patent Reexamination Board made a review decision to declare all patents invalid.
Subsequently, in the case of infringement related to the case, the prosecution of Guangsheng Company was successively rejected by the court. Among them, on March 29, 2018, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court rejected Guangsheng’s lawsuit against Skyworth; March 30, 2018 Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court rejected the lawsuit filed by Guangsheng Company against Samsung.
On May 4, 2018, the patent involved in the case was 'Audio Coding and Decoding System', and the patent invalidation request filed by Skyworth et al., and the Patent Reexamination Board made a review decision to declare the patent part invalid.
On July 5, 2018, the patent involved in the case was 'method and equipment for decoding audio signals', and the patent invalidation request filed by Hisense et al., the Patent Reexamination Board made a review decision to declare the patent part invalid.
China Cailian came forward: Although not prosecuted, but participated in two patent invalidation cases
It is worth mentioning that in the case of Hisense and Skyworth’s request for invalidation of the patent of Guangsheng Company, the figure of “Shenzhen Zhongcaian Technology Co., Ltd.” (hereinafter referred to as China Lottery Company) appeared. The corresponding patent infringement lawsuit, the company has not been charged.
According to the information from the website of the State Intellectual Property Office, as of July 15, 2018, the number of inventions filed by China Lottery was 6, and there were no inventions, utility models and design patents authorized under the name.
Simply put, China Lottery has no strong technical strength, so why does it appear in patent invalidation cases?
According to public information, China Lottery was established on March 6, 2007. It was jointly established by ten shareholders including TCL, Changhong, Konka, Skyworth, Hisense, Haier, Xoceco, SVA, Xinke, and Xiaxin. TV patent licensing company.
It is said that the company not only established a domestic advanced color TV patent information public service platform, but also built the first domestic color TV patent pool.
Therefore, China Lottery may be a typical patent-operated company. Although it does not conduct technical research and development and patent applications itself, due to the relationship of shareholders, it may operate some TV-related patents held by shareholders. Maintenance, including the realization of cross-licensing authorization between TV manufacturers, and on behalf of shareholders and other manufacturers holding TV-related patents to negotiate patent licensing cooperation.
Judging from the progress of the current patent litigation cases, China Lottery has also exerted the value of its application. In the invalidation of the two patents involved, the result of the partial invalidation was obtained, effectively reducing the risk of Skyworth and Hisense losing in the corresponding litigation.
4. IBM accused Groupon of patent infringement claims of $167 million;
On the morning of July 17th, Beijing time, at the beginning of the federal trial, IBM’s lawyers said that Groupon used IBM’s e-commerce invention without permission to develop its own online group buying business and required its patents. Claims for infringement. IBM asked the juror to allow Groupon to pay $166.5 million for the use of its four patented technologies. In the federal district court trial in Wilmington, Delaware, this claim is expected to be the focus of both sides.
IBM lawyer John De Mares said in a trial that Groupon, based in Chicago, entered the e-commerce market 'relatively late', using IBM's existing technology to build a business. He said that many companies, including Amazon and Facebook. They all bought licenses for patented technology from IBM, but Groupon didn't buy it. 'The newcomer refuses to be responsible for the technology it uses. IBM has spent billions of dollars on R&D every year to make our lives easier.' De Mares said.
Groupon's attorney David Harden said that IBM is not using the patents mentioned in the case, and that he said this cannot be established. Harden said that IBM uses its large number of 'patent stocks' to ensure that any online The companies that do business must go through IBM. 'We came this step because IBM has another business (patent licensing business), a business they don't promote in TV commercials.' He said.
The case will be closely watched by the online advertising and marketing industry. At least 10 companies, including Go Daddy Operating Co, LinkedIn and Twitter, have been involved in the lawsuit, claiming information related to IBM's previous patent transactions.
Two of the patents involved in the case came from a Prodigy online service that was launched in the late 1980s, one of which expired in 2015. Another patent that expired in 2016 is a relationship. To the business of keeping the customer and server continuous dialogue information. The fourth patent involved is related to certification and will expire in 2025. This is the latest patent in this case.
Previously, IBM accused online travel company Priceline of infringing three of the four patents. In December 2017, the two sides reached a secret settlement. The US District Judge Leonard Stark, who is now responsible for IBM and Groupon patent cases, last year 10 Month ruled that Priceline did not infringe the fourth patent. IBM subsequently filed an appeal with the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
In the past 25 years, IBM has ranked first in the number of US patents per year, and it has a history of 9,043 patents in 2017. - The company reported that its 2017 intellectual property license revenue has reached 1.19 billion US dollars.
Bloomberg think tank analyst Matt Larsen said that although the intellectual property license contributed less than 2% to IBM's revenue, it was a very profitable business for the company. He said that IBM sued Groupon. It is because the two parties failed to reach a patent licensing agreement in 2011.
Larsen said the trial 'may become an important bargaining chip for IBM to reach a larger licensing agreement' and will 'check the value of the IBM patent portfolio'. In the past three quarters, IBM's patent licensing revenue has remained relatively flat. Sen said that if it can reach an agreement with Groupon, this will promote the further development of this high-profit business.
Larsen said that if Groupon wins, it may affect IBM's ability to follow-up after the existing agreement expires, so the results of this case will have an impact on the companies involved in the case and the companies IBM is trying to cooperate with. Sina Technology