Apple patent case: Wisconsin university wins huge damages

A US jury has ordered technology giant Apple to pay more than $234m (£152m) in damages for patent infringement.

The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the patent licensing arm of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the verdict was important to guard its inventions from unauthorised use.

The jury had earlier decided that Apple incorporated patented microchip technology into some iPhones and iPads without permission. (Read the full story from BBC here)

================================================================

Apparently, one of the many technologies in Apple's iPhone was recognized by a jury in USA to be the same as that invented and patented by University Wisconsin-Madison Professor Gurindar Sohi.

The microchip technology patented by Professor Sohi was designed to boost the performance of computer processors.  

Based on my laymanish understanding of how patents work, when patents are filed and approved, that particular technology is no longer confidential and is now in public domain. To use the technology, the patent can be bought from the inventor (or entity to which the patent is assigned), or licensed --  that is to pay the inventor or entity a certain consideration in order to use the technology.  

However, I'm not certain if there are regulations in place to ensure that licenses are properly acquired before the technology in the patent is used in a product.

Patents are valuable as they represent a stream of revenue for inventors or entities assigned the patents, in addition to recognizing the inventor's contributions to the technology.  

Obviously, if licences are not acquired before using the technology, there are savings to be made.  And also obviously, should the inventors or entities take action against infringers of patents, and should the Court hold the infringement, damages for patent infringement would be expected.  In addition to damages to be paid, I would think that damages to the reputation of the company as one that does not respect intellectual property would also happen.  However, most consumers might not be concerned when this happens as this would not affect them directly.