Nathan Myhrvold

Nathan Myhrvold’s Intellectual Ventures has reached its second settlement agreement in its case against manufacturers in the semiconductor industry.

The company announced today that it signed a license agreement and resolved a patent suit from a case filed in December 2010 against Lattice Semiconductor.

Intellectual Ventures reached a similar settlement agreement in January with Microsemi, a maker of semiconductor systems for the communications, defense and aerospace industries.

Settlement terms were not revealed for today’s agreement. But Lattice Semiconductor, a Portland-based company that designs and develops programmable power and clock solutions, has agreed to license portions of Intellectual Ventures’ patent portfolio going forward.

“Lattice is the second company to reach a settlement agreement with IV in this case, and we continue to pursue productive discussions with the other defendants,” Melissa Finocchio, vice president and chief litigation counsel for Intellectual Ventures, said in a press release. “IV has dedicated considerable resources to building a portfolio of semiconductor assets and these settlements reinforce the quality of our patent portfolio.”

Last fall, Intellectual Ventures announced legal settlements with SK hynix and Elpida Memory, makers of memory used in computers and gadgets. Those deals marked the first major legal settlements for Bellevue-based Intellectual Ventures.

Like what you're reading? Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline


  • guest

    if you want to play, you gotta pay.

  • optimic

    with hopeful legislation the patent trolls will have less bullying power in the future.
    This is ridiculous how is now

  • JackMMD

    I see Geekwire has handed over rewording IV press releases to Taylor Soper now…

    • guest

      I see you’re the type who shoots the messenger when he doesn’t like the message. Taylor reported the facts. No more, no less.

      • JackMMD

        It’s more about selective reporting on some companies, combined with little added value or perspective compared to what the company’s PR department is putting out.

        Everything IV does is reported on here, big or small. Let’s look at the last post about IV… it’s from the last time IV released a press release:

        That post is also mostly a restatement of the press release. In fact — though it’s been cleaned up now — there was some leftover text copied from the press release that has now been removed (I still have the original). You can see someone refers to it in the comments. I also find it disappointing that the press release wasn’t even linked to in the post.

        I’m glad that Taylor Soper linked to the press release here. That’s an improvement.

        Frankly, instead of a post like this, why not just have a sentence or two, a link to the source, and links for past coverage? The goal being that it will become clear to the reader that most of the content is coming from a press release. I would find that valuable.

        Thanks for reading.

        • guest

          I don’t think GW’s reporting on IV is any more selective than their coverage of anyone else, except maybe Apple since they’re all fanboys ;-) If you plug the company name into the site’s search capability, instead of selectively picking just the last article, you’ll find all sorts of coverage. Some is like this one, and others focus on allegations of patent trolling. It would be great if reworded press releases, or entire company-shopped content, wasn’t so prevalent in the media. But let’s get real, both are rampant and there’s actually very little original content available. I do agree that more transparency surrounding that practice would be desirable. But I guess if it bothered me enough I always have the option of creating my own site, as do you.

  • guest

    ey man IV isn’t made of only patent trolls

Job Listings on GeekWork

Find more jobs on GeekWork. Employers, post a job here.