Strategy in TECH...
In yet another sign of patent success for Sonos, major industry player Legrand has agreed to a multi-year licensing deal to cover the technology used in their Nuvo line of wireless multi-room products. This is yet another sign that tends to add to the growing power of the Sonos patent portfolio covering these technologies.
A hearing before a California federal judge brought an ugly exchange between attorneys for both Sonos and Google – with each side pointing their finger at the other and accusing them of bad faith. That attorneys got ugly against their counterparts is not in itself surprising. However, the speed with which this dispute devolved to that point was a surprise.
Sonos announced on Tuesday that it has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against tech powerhouse Google – by far their biggest…and potentially riskiest…action yet. And perhaps keeping Emerson’s quote in mind, Sonos took a double punch at the king, filing a lawsuit against Google in the District Court for the Central District of California…AND at the same time, filing a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission. This is the first time, Sonos has started a war on two fronts, suggesting to me that they are deadly serious in this effort.
After receiving a stipulation allowing them more time to respond, Lenbrook Industries Ltd, and Lenbrook America, last week filed their response to the Sonos patent litigation they were hit with in June. It was a robust and smart response that clearly communicated that Lenbrook planned to give no ground in this dispute.
While perhaps not quite as audacious as the D&M response when they were first dealt the blow of litigation…Lenbrook offered a smart and savvy response that not only pushed back but seemingly undercuts many of Sonos’ core allegations..and patents.
Strata-gee reported yesterday that late last week Sonos had filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Lenbrook Industries Limited and Lenbrook America. This suit, which is almost identical to the one Sonos had successfully pursued with D&M Holdings and Denon over its HEOS line, was resolved in Sonos’s favor a little over a year ago.
Now we have Lenbrook’s response to this development – the company says it will “defend vigorously the claims of patent infringement made by computer audio company Sonos…”
Global competition continues to heat up and nowhere is that more obvious than a recent analysis from the World Intellectual Property Organization noting that in 2018 – for the first time in human history – the region of Asia filed the majority of all international patent applications. This new reality suggests that Asia is “rapidly increasing their presence in global innovation,” the report says.
And which company in particular was tops in the world for innovation? WIPO says it was Huawei Technologies, who filed the most patents from a single company in the world.
As we recently reported, a federal jury gave Sonos a sweeping victory in the first “bellwether trial” in Sonos Inc. v. D&M Holdings Inc. et al, siding with Sonos on all counts and awarding them nearly $2 million in damages. Furthermore, the jury affirmed the validity of the three Sonos patents at issue, and disagreed with D&M’s assertion that the patents were not valid.
Strata-gee spoke with both sides of this case and, this decision notwithstanding, neither appears ready to back down, even as this is just the first of what will ultimately be three trials in the case – two where Sonos is the plaintiff, and a countersuit by D&M Holdings where they will be the plaintiff. Sonos won round one, but this is a multi-round fight.
Last Friday, after a full week of testimony, evidence, deposition playbacks, and attorney posturing, members of the jury listened closely as Judge William C. Bryson delivered instructions designed to clarify their deliberative process and their duty as “finders of fact” in the matter of Sonos, Inc. v. D&M Holdings Inc. d/b/a/The D+M Group, D&M Holdings U.S. Inc., and Denon Electronics (USA), LLC. The judges verbal instructions took a while to relay, as the reality is that patent disputes can be quite complex and the issues of intellectual property quite nuanced yet important.
In written form, which the Judge provided the jury for their easy referral, his instructions ran a full 27-pages long. After considering it all, the jury came back with a finding in favor of Sonos on all counts – and delivered an award to Sonos of just under $2 million for damages.
Ever since Sonos filed their patent infringement case against D&M Holdings – in reference to its then new HEOS line – things started out like the opening salvo in a boxing match. That was over three years ago in October 2014 and after an initial flurry, including the filing of a countersuit by D&M Holdings, the event went on to settle down into more of a wrestling match, as opposed to boxing. Each side jockeyed for leverage on the other, with our judgment giving a slight advantage to Sonos, whose legal team seemed just slightly better in their approach perhaps even winning over the judge in a series of mostly favorable rulings.
Now, on the eve of trial and in front of a new judge, things are really moving from its long, low simmer to a boil – in fact, boiling over in the days leading up to trial next week starting December 11.
In an interesting article in the Harvard Business Review, author Walter Frick cites several studies whose results suggest that where companies treat workers better, there is more innovation. Sound crazy? Not a connection you’d usually make? Actually, the article notes a few studies where researchers directly correlated a company’s score of worker treatment against their patent filings. The results appear to hold up, across different studies in different industries in different countries.
