Google ordered to pay royalty on AdWords revenue to Vringo

The judge ruled on the royalty rate after the companies did not come to an agreement on it

Google has been ordered by a court in Virginia to pay royalty to I/P Engine for infringing some claims of two of its patents through the AdWords advertising system.

District Judge Raymond A. Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk division decided Tuesday that I/P Engine, a patent licensing subsidiary of Vringo, should be paid an ongoing royalty rate of 6.5 percent on a part of AdWords revenue.

Google had earlier argued that it had redesigned AdWords, and functions of the system that I/P Engine held to be infringing had been removed even before the entry of judgment. It held that if royalties were warranted, it should be in a lump sum, according to court records.

But the judge ruled earlier this month that the modified system was "nothing more than a colorable variation of the system adjudged to infringe." The judge also ordered the parties to meet to negotiate an appropriate ongoing royalty rate.

Google, which has already appealed the court's decisions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is planning to appeal the royalty award as well. "We believe strongly in our pending appeal in this matter, and we anticipate seeking Federal Circuit review of today's decision as well," Google's patent counsel Jennifer Polse said in a statement Tuesday.

The lawsuit dates back to Sept. 15, 2011, when I/P Engine filed a complaint against AOL, Google, Target and others, alleging that the defendants had infringed two of its patents through the AdWords search advertising system which the companies were using.

The two patents -- U.S Patent no. 6,314,420 entitled "Collaborative/adaptive search engine" and Patent No. 6,775,664 entitled "Information filter system and method for integrated content-based and collaborative/adaptive feedback queries"-- relate to relevance filtering technology used in search to place advertisements in the best positions. They were acquired from Lycos, one of the earliest participants in the search engine industry.

On Nov. 6, 2012, a jury reached a verdict finding that Google and the other defendants had infringed the asserted claims of the two I/P Engine patents. The jury awarded I/P Engine US$30.5 million in damages without interest, and a running royalty rate of 3.5 percent instead of a lump sum. In an order this month, the District Court ordered that I/P Engine recover an additional sum of $17.32 million from the defendants for supplemental damages and prejudgment interest.

I/P Engine has been awarded the royalty rate of 6.5 percent, after it asked for an increase in the royalty rate awarded by the jury. In August, the court entered an order finding that I/P Engine was entitled to an ongoing royalty with a royalty base of 20.9 percent, and that royalty payments should be made on a quarterly basis. The royalty base is that part of AdWords revenue that can be attributed to the infringing features. The effective rate of royalty on AdWords revenue is hence likely to be about 1.36 percent.

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com

Join the newsletter!

Or

Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags internetGoogleadvertisinglegalintellectual propertypatentI/P EngineVringo

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

John Ribeiro

IDG News Service
Show Comments

Father’s Day Gift Guide

Brand Post

Most Popular Reviews

Latest Articles

Resources

PCW Evaluation Team

Luke Hill

MSI GT75 TITAN

I need power and lots of it. As a Front End Web developer anything less just won’t cut it which is why the MSI GT75 is an outstanding laptop for me. It’s a sleek and futuristic looking, high quality, beast that has a touch of sci-fi flare about it.

Emily Tyson

MSI GE63 Raider

If you’re looking to invest in your next work horse laptop for work or home use, you can’t go wrong with the MSI GE63.

Laura Johnston

MSI GS65 Stealth Thin

If you can afford the price tag, it is well worth the money. It out performs any other laptop I have tried for gaming, and the transportable design and incredible display also make it ideal for work.

Andrew Teoh

Brother MFC-L9570CDW Multifunction Printer

Touch screen visibility and operation was great and easy to navigate. Each menu and sub-menu was in an understandable order and category

Louise Coady

Brother MFC-L9570CDW Multifunction Printer

The printer was convenient, produced clear and vibrant images and was very easy to use

Edwina Hargreaves

WD My Cloud Home

I would recommend this device for families and small businesses who want one safe place to store all their important digital content and a way to easily share it with friends, family, business partners, or customers.

Featured Content

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?