News

Image Processing Technologies and Canon Settle Patent Lawsuit

Canon Obtains License Under Patent Portfolio of Image Processing Technologies LLC

Suffern, N.Y. — May 22, 2013 — Image Processing Technologies LLC (Image Processing) announced today that it has settled its patent infringement litigation with Canon Inc. and Canon U.S.A., Inc. Image Processing is a subsidiary of General Patent Corporation (GPC), the leading intellectual property boutique focusing on patent licensing and enforcement.

Image Processing sued Canon Inc. and Canon U.S.A., Inc. in the District Court for the Eastern District of New York in 2010 (CV 10–3867). The trial was scheduled to begin on April 15. The parties have resolved protracted litigation concerning Image Processing’s U.S. Patent No. 6,959,293 and reached an amicable settlement. Canon has taken a license under Image Processing’s patents, but other terms and conditions of the settlement are confidential.

Alexander Poltorak Quoted in Associated Press Article

GPC's Chairman and CEO Alexander Poltorak was quoted in an Associated Press (AP) article that was published by dozens of outlets internationally, including Yahoo!Finance, CBSNews.com, ABCnews.com, The Miami Herald, The Huffington Post, The San Francisco Chronicle, NPR.org, St. Petersburg Times, The Chicago Tribune, MSNBC.com, and The Australian.

Patent holder sues smart phone makers over patents

By PETER SVENSSON
July 9, 2010

Alexander Poltorak Quoted in Associated Press Article

GPC's Chairman and CEO Alexander Poltorak was quoted in an Associated Press (AP) article that was published by dozens of outlets internationally, including Yahoo!Finance, CBSNews.com, ABCnews.com, The Miami Herald, The Huffington Post, The San Francisco Chronicle, NPR.org, St. Petersburg Times, The Chicago Tribune, MSNBC.com, and The Australian.

Patent holder sues smart phone makers over patents

By PETER SVENSSON
July 9, 2010

NEW YORK (AP) - The patent-holding company that won a settlement of more than $600 million from the maker of the BlackBerry said Friday it has sued six other companies in the smart phone industry.

Patent company NTP Inc. is suing Apple Inc., Google Inc., Microsoft Corp., HTC Corp., Motorola Inc. and LG Electronics Inc., claiming infringement of the same patents that were at issue in its case against BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd.

General Patent Corporation Licenses Key Cell Phone Patent Owned by DTL to Mid-Rivers Telephone Cooperative

Suffern, NY - August 6, 2009 - General Patent Corporation (GPC), a leading patent licensing and patent enforcement firm, announced today on behalf of its client, Digital Technology Licensing LLC (DTL), that it has licensed DTL's key cell phone patent to Mid-Rivers Telephone Cooperative, Inc. of Circle, MT.

General Patent Corporation Licenses Key Cell Phone Patent Owned by DTL to Mid-Rivers Telephone Cooperative

Suffern, NY - August 6, 2009 - General Patent Corporation (GPC), a leading patent licensing and patent enforcement firm, announced today on behalf of its client, Digital Technology Licensing LLC (DTL), that it has licensed DTL's key cell phone patent to Mid-Rivers Telephone Cooperative, Inc. of Circle, MT.

DTL owns US Patent No. 5,051,799 titled "Digital Output Transducer." This patented technology covers Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) codec and other cellular communication standards and is used to assure backward compatibility of cell phone handsets and base stations. Other applications of this patented technology include Bluetooth devices.

"We are very pleased to extend a license under the DTL patent to Mid-Rivers," said Paul Lerner, General Patent's Sr. Vice President and General Counsel. "Licensing of the DTL patent is available to other cell phone providers at our standard royalty rate of 0.7% on non-discriminatory terms."

Protecting The Interests Of American Inventors

General Patent CEO Alex Poltorak on Protecting the Interest of American Inventors

(Published in Washington Watch)

(NAPSI)-Recycling a piece of failed legislation is not the best way to protect American inventors or spur innovation. That's the opinion of many who think that the Patent Reform Act of 2009, recently introduced in the Congress in an attempt to change the U.S. patent law, is just a warmed-over version of a proposed policy package that didn't pass the first time it was introduced in 2007.

According to law, a patent is a property right--a quid pro quo for invention disclosure. Issued by a government, it provides an inventor with the right to control the use of his or her invention, and for a limited time exclude others from making, using, selling or importing a patented invention without the inventor's permission.

Patent Infringement News 2

Another Problematic Provision in the America Invents Act Targets Business Method Patents

July 11, 2011 – Though it didn’t get as much press as the “first to invent” change, Section 18 of the Senate version of the America Invents Act (S. 23) – a provision making it easier for the banking industry to invalidate business method patents – fueled speculation that Wall Street had bought a favor from Congress.

The provision was introduced by Charles Schumer (D-NY) as a result of the legislative headaches his big bank constituents were suffering from a company called DataTreasury Corporation.

Representative Aaron Schock (R-IL), who tried to strike the provision, said it would allow “the financial services industry to challenge patents that have already been found valid both at the U.S. Patent and Trade Office and in Federal Court.”

Inside the Fight over US Patent Reform

"Inside the fight over US patent reform” from May/June 2009 Intellectual Asset Management - Commentary by General Patent Chairman and CEO Alexander Poltorak. An excerpt from the article appears below, or click the link below the text for a downloadable PDF of the excerpt.

From “Inside the Fight over US Patent Reform,” Intellectual Asset Management, May/June 2009:

Alexander Poltorak
Chairman and CEO, General Patent Corporation, US

I am fundamentally opposed to the proposed Patent Reform Act of 2009. The proposed reforms cover many issues already addressed by the courts; they are at best superfluous and at worst damaging to innovation in the US.

The apportionment of damages, for example, will result in devaluing patents – the currency of a knowledge-based economy – and will make them more difficult to enforce, which will inevitably slow down innovation, weaken the economy and ultimately result in job loss.