They Started It!

30 May 2019 Dashboard Insights Blog
Authors: Chethan K. Srinivasa

While traditional automakers may be keen to avoid patent wars, as discussed in a previous blog post A Patent War Without Fighting, high tech companies developing innovative connected or autonomous vehicle technologies may not be so like minded. Traditional automakers can leverage their brand loyalties, partnerships, deeply integrated supply chains and significant manufacturing experience as competitive differentiators. However, high tech companies may derive a significant portion of their value through their patented innovation, making them more likely to assert their patents to protect their technologies and reach their business goals.

As high tech companies increasingly integrate their technologies with vehicles, there has been an upward trend in automobile-related patent litigation. Recently, self-driving car startup Voyage was sued by Sucxess for technology related to retrofitting cars with drive-by-wire kits. Sucxess, an “engineering-services firm” whose founder was formerly an engineer at a traditional automaker, claims that Voyage “wouldn’t exist without these cars … and [they] are getting some real value by using [Sucxess’s] patent.” Taking a page from the high tech playbook, Sucxess is trying to “make money with [their] own patents.”

In another recent example, American GNC Corp., a technology company that specializes in guidance, navigation, control and communications (GNCC), sued Toyota over autonomous car navigation patents. American GNC asserted three patents related to autonomous vehicle navigation that allegedly read on aspects of navigation, cruise control, and collision avoidance technology. Indeed, high tech companies trying to increase revenue may do so by leveraging the patent assets they have, which is commonplace in the high tech industry.

High tech companies, instead of the traditional automakers, appear to be responsible for the recent increase in the number of patent infringement suits in the automotive space. Historically, since there were only a few big traditional automakers in the U.S. and they had other strengths to leverage, it was easy for them to have a “gentlemen’s agreement” to not assert patents. But with the increased competition due to the significant number of new tech companies entering this space, the era of the gentlemen’s agreement may be replaced with an increase in patent battles as these tech companies port their monetization strategies to the automotive space.

It’s unclear how traditional automakers will react. They may battle it out, or they may continue to strive for their non-confrontational culture. For example, they may counter sue, obtain a license for the patented technology, or even pre-emptively acquire the company for its patent portfolio before any patent is asserted. Whether traditional automakers respond in kind or otherwise, they may now have to find new ways to navigate in their own space.

 
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

A Review of Recent Whistleblower Developments
19 July 2019
Legal News: Whistleblower Developments
Cloud security inadequate for Cyber threats, are you surprised?
19 July 2019
Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog
Blockchain: A Tool With a Future in Healthcare
18 July 2019
Health Care Law Today
Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ