Twitter paid $36 million to avoid patent lawsuit with IBM
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Twitter paid $36 million to avoid patent lawsuit with IBM

Twitter paid $36 million to avoid a patent infringement suit with IBM, according to SEC documents made publicly available on Thursday

twitter-logo.jpg

Last month, the two companies announced they had reached an agreement that settled a 2013 claim by IBM that the microblogging site infringed on three of its patents. But the financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.

The cost of the transaction was revealed last week when the SEC published Twitter’s Form 10-K, an annual disclosure of a company’s financial performance. The document also revealed that Twitter now owns 956 patents and has another 100 patent applications pending. Before it filed its IPO in November, Twitter owned just nine patents.

The dispute first became public in October last year, when Twitter revealed in its S-1 filing that IBM had invited it to "to negotiate a business resolution of the allegations.”

In the filing, Twitter wrote: “We believe we have meritorious defenses to IBM's allegations, although there can be no assurance that we will be successful in defending against these allegations or reaching a business resolution that is satisfactory to us.”

The patents at issue were US Patent No 6,957,224, relating to the efficient retrieval of uniform resource locators; No 7,072,849, relating to a method for presenting advertising in an interactive service; and No 7,099,862, relating to programmatic discovery of common contacts.

Under the deal announced in February, Twitter agreed to purchase more than 900 patents from IBM. The two companies also reached a cross-licensing agreement.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The Munich Regional Court ruled that Lenovo was an unwilling licensee and had engaged in ‘holdout’ tactics
Technological innovation should play a critical role in advancing sustainable practices, argues Justin Delfino, global head of IP and R&D at Evalueserve
Ewan Grist of Bird & Bird, who acted for Lidl in its trademark victory against Tesco, reveals some of the lessons brand owners can take from the judgment
Dolby’s lawsuit at the Delhi High Court follows a record win by Ericsson earlier this year against the same defendant
Tee Tan, chief information officer at the owner of several IP firms, says to avoid tech just for the sake of it and explains how his company builds in-house tools
Regardless of whether the FTC’s ban on non-competes goes into effect, businesses should stop relying on these agreements
Mary Till, a former legal advisor at the USPTO who has joined Finnegan this week, is looking forward to providing clients with a USPTO perspective
IP in-house counsel who receive lots of pitches from AI vendors explain how they review them – or why they ignore them
Anna Sosis discusses the importance of IP education and explains why, away from IP, she could see herself becoming a mindfulness teacher
Cross-border judicial collaboration and EU copyright were hot topics on the second day of the EUIPO’s 5th IP Case Law Conference
Gift this article