LG To Leverage Intellectual Ventures Patent Portofolio Through License Agreement
LG Electronics has become the latest smartphone maker to sign a deal with the patent house Intellectual Ventures.
The deal provides LG with a license to IV's extensive patent portfolio, which contains more than 35,000 IP assets in more than 50 technology areas.
As an IV customer, LG has access to IV's portfolio to defend itself from potential litigation. IV's patents can serve in counter-assertion, enabling more efficient negotiations to reduce liabilities and achieve favorable licensing terms.
"LG's patent portfolio is strong and is a critical element to our business strategy," said Jeong Hwan Lee, executive vice president and head of LG's Intellectual Property Center. "Our alliance with IV gives us access to patents outside our core and allows us the freedom to focus on what's important in our industry constant innovation."
"Intellectual Ventures offers an efficient way to access the invention rights companies need to stay competitive within the market," said Mario Obeidat, head of telecommunications licensing at Intellectual Ventures.
LG had to pay Kodak $414m in 2009 for infringing the camera maker's digital imaging rights.
As an IV customer, LG has access to IV's portfolio to defend itself from potential litigation. IV's patents can serve in counter-assertion, enabling more efficient negotiations to reduce liabilities and achieve favorable licensing terms.
"LG's patent portfolio is strong and is a critical element to our business strategy," said Jeong Hwan Lee, executive vice president and head of LG's Intellectual Property Center. "Our alliance with IV gives us access to patents outside our core and allows us the freedom to focus on what's important in our industry constant innovation."
"Intellectual Ventures offers an efficient way to access the invention rights companies need to stay competitive within the market," said Mario Obeidat, head of telecommunications licensing at Intellectual Ventures.
LG had to pay Kodak $414m in 2009 for infringing the camera maker's digital imaging rights.
