IPR

Conversational AI reshapes global commerce

by

Conversational artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming how consumers shop and interact with brands. As voice-driven and chat-based shopping tools spread across technology and retail industries, the patents behind this innovation are drawing major attention.

Inventor Stephen Byrd, founder of Voicee LLC, has emerged as a key figure in this movement. His portfolio of foundational patents in conversational AI commerce is being recognized as a cornerstone of the growing market.

Voicee patents validated internationally

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has issued a written opinion confirming the novelty and inventiveness of ten core claims in Byrd’s patent family. The validation strengthens Voicee’s intellectual property position across multiple jurisdictions.

According to the company, these patents cover the entire AI commerce pipeline—from identifying products inside content to generating voice-based or chat-based purchase offers. The portfolio is being described as a “defensive patent thicket” designed to protect the future of conversational transactions.

Retail and tech giants embrace conversational shopping

Voicee’s announcement coincides with a surge in AI-powered retail experiences. Walmart’s partnership with OpenAI to build a generative-AI shopping assistant highlights how voice and chat interfaces are reshaping digital retail.

Industry observers say this boom in AI commerce validates Byrd’s early vision. “Stephen Byrd’s inventions anticipated how conversational systems would merge shopping and interaction,” said Voicee in its statement. The company claims its patent-pending technologies align closely with new retail tools now entering the market.

Patent auction begins amid rising demand

Voicee has launched a patent auction for exclusive sector-specific licenses. Interested companies can bid for rights to use the patented technologies within their industries.

The auction closes on December 2, 2025, and covers key areas such as retail, e-commerce, and digital marketing. Voicee says the goal is to create strategic partnerships while ensuring fair access to its protected technologies.

Global implications for AI and retail

The rise of conversational AI commerce is reshaping digital ecosystems. Tech giants, retailers, and startups are investing heavily in voice-driven assistants and chat-based sales systems.

Industry experts note that Byrd’s patents could become central to future licensing discussions, especially as conversational commerce becomes a standard part of consumer engagement.

While the full commercial impact remains to be seen, the validation of Voicee’s patents marks a significant milestone in AI-powered retail technology. The ongoing auction signals how intellectual property will play a decisive role in the next phase of AI innovation.

American Clean Energy Faces Growing Patent Pressure from Foreign Rivals

by

The United States clean energy industry is feeling the heat from foreign patent competition, as global innovation accelerates in solar, wind, and battery technologies. A new report by OilPrice.com warns that foreign firms, particularly from China, are reshaping the intellectual property (IP) landscape and squeezing U.S. players out of key technology domains.

Growth Slows Across Renewable Sectors

U.S. clean energy capacity is projected to grow only 7 percent in 2025 — the weakest rate in over a decade. Wind power is expected to expand just 1.8 percent, its slowest growth since 2010. Analysts attribute this slowdown to a mix of policy delays, permitting hurdles, and competitive patent claims that make domestic expansion more complex.

Offshore wind projects have faced funding cuts and regulatory freezes, further eroding investor confidence in American renewables.

Foreign Patents Redefining Innovation Boundaries

The article highlights a surge in patent filings by non-U.S. firms. Chinese, European, and Canadian companies now dominate patent registries in core clean energy technologies such as solar cells, energy storage, and grid efficiency systems.

This trend complicates efforts by U.S. companies to secure exclusive rights or defend against infringement suits. Many of the latest clean energy innovations are born outside the United States, where U.S. patent examiners struggle to verify prior art or challenge overlapping claims.

Ongoing Legal Battles Intensify

Recent court cases illustrate the deepening patent conflict.

  • Tigo Energy and SMA Solar Technology reached a settlement over rapid shutdown systems for solar installations.
  • Maxeon Solar Technologies has sued Canadian Solar and other firms for allegedly infringing its TOPCon solar cell patents.

Such disputes underscore the rising legal costs and strategic risks facing American renewable energy manufacturers.

China’s Lead in Clean Energy Technology

China’s rapid clean energy growth adds pressure on U.S. companies. The country has not only scaled up solar and wind manufacturing but also unveiled the world’s first operational thorium reactor — a symbol of its advanced energy ambitions.

Chinese firms enjoy state subsidies, integrated supply chains, and broad patent portfolios that strengthen their global influence. Industry experts warn that this combination could limit U.S. access to critical technologies and components.

Patent System Under Strain

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) faces increasing difficulty handling foreign-dominated innovation landscapes. Examiners often lack access to non-U.S. databases and prior art in languages like Chinese or Korean.

Legal experts suggest American firms must adapt by narrowing patent claims, improving defensive IP strategies, and pursuing international licensing or joint ventures.

Outlook: Balancing Innovation and Protection

As the U.S. races to meet its climate and energy goals, intellectual property strategy could become a key battleground. Strengthening domestic R&D, improving patent transparency, and streamlining approval processes are now critical to keeping pace with foreign competitors.

Analysts believe that without decisive action, the United States risks losing not only technological leadership but also control over the future of global clean energy.

Samsung Files Patent for Self-Healing Foldable Display

by

Samsung continues to push the boundaries of smartphone innovation. The company has filed a new patent that describes a self-healing foldable display designed to protect delicate areas such as the camera, fingerprint sensor, and internal screen layers.

A Smarter Way to Protect Foldable Screens

According to the patent report, Samsung’s design uses a smart sensing structure that can detect and respond to damage on the display. Two ultra-thin wires are placed in separate layers around cutouts for sensors and cameras. These wires work together to sense cracks or damage forming near these critical regions.

When a microcrack is detected, the system can trigger dummy metal patterns to strengthen the weak spot and stop the crack from spreading. This process acts like a built-in repair mechanism that prevents long-term damage to the screen.

Defense Against Moisture and Wear

Samsung’s design also adds microscopic grooves and protective sealants around the display area. These help block moisture and oxygen from entering the display layers. This extra protection could extend the lifespan of foldable phones, which often suffer from screen fatigue and air exposure after extended use.

Improving In-Display Fingerprint Sensors

The patent also highlights Samsung’s efforts to make in-display fingerprint sensors more reliable in foldable devices. Current foldable screens are thinner and more flexible, which makes it difficult to embed fingerprint modules without risking cracks or distortion. The new design aims to fix that by creating a more durable area around the sensor.

What Self-Healing Means

The “self-healing” technology in Samsung’s patent doesn’t mean the screen can completely repair itself. Instead, it focuses on early detection and containment of micro-damage. By reinforcing weak points in real time, the display can maintain its performance and prevent bigger failures.

Future of Foldable Durability

Samsung’s innovation comes at a time when durability remains a major concern for foldable phone users. If implemented, this technology could significantly improve screen longevity and reduce repair costs.

While the patent does not confirm when Samsung will use this feature, it shows the company’s strong focus on advancing foldable technology. The design could appear in future models of the Galaxy Z Fold or Z Flip series.

Samsung has not made an official statement about the patent yet. However, the concept reinforces the brand’s leadership in flexible display research and its goal to make foldable devices tougher and smarter.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Philips’ Video CD Patent Infringement Claim

by

Court says company failed to prove infringement; 21-year legal battle ends

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a 21-year-old patent infringement suit filed by Philips against a Delhi-based optical disc manufacturer. The court ruled that the electronics giant failed to prove that the defendants had infringed its patent related to Video CD (VCD) technology.

Philips had filed the case in 2004, alleging that BCI Optical Disc Limited and others had copied its patented system used in VCDs. The company claimed its technology covered a system involving a transmitter, receiver, and transmission medium used in encoding and decoding digital video content.

Justice Prathiba M. Singh, who heard the matter, held that Philips could not establish infringement of each element of its patent claim. The court said the plaintiff did not map the essential components of the patent to the processes used by the defendants.

Patent expired during litigation

The judgment noted that Philips’ patent had already expired in 2010, during the pendency of the case. The expiry meant that the company could no longer claim monopoly rights over the technology.

The court observed that even before expiry, Philips had not produced adequate technical evidence to prove that the defendants’ products or systems contained the same features as its patented invention.

“The plaintiff has failed to prove that the defendants’ process incorporates all the essential elements of the patented system,” the court said.

Replication process not infringement

The defendants argued that they were only replicating discs from master copies supplied by other sources. They stated that they did not create or encode the original master discs that contained the video data.

The court accepted this argument. It ruled that the process of replication—simply copying data onto new discs—does not amount to infringing a system patent that relates to data transmission or encoding.

Justice Singh said the act of replication lacked the “functional steps” that formed part of Philips’ patented method.

Philips targeted wrong parties

The court also remarked that Philips should have taken legal action against the companies that created the original master discs instead of the replicators.

It said Philips had failed to demonstrate how the replication process used by BCI Optical involved any step that used the patented technology.

This observation highlighted the court’s focus on identifying direct infringers rather than secondary participants in the supply chain.

Significance of the ruling

The decision reinforces the principle that in patent infringement suits, the burden of proof lies on the patent holder. A plaintiff must demonstrate how every element of a patent claim is used by the alleged infringer.

Legal experts say the ruling will influence how multinational corporations approach patent enforcement in India. It underlines the importance of detailed claim mapping and technical evidence before filing infringement suits.

The case also demonstrates the practical challenge of enforcing technology patents that expire during lengthy litigation. Once a patent expires, it loses protection, limiting the remedies a company can seek.

Conclusion

The Delhi High Court’s ruling marks the end of a legal battle that began more than two decades ago. Philips’ attempt to enforce its Video CD patent has ended in defeat, with the court holding that the company failed to establish infringement or provide sufficient proof.

The case highlights a broader issue in India’s patent litigation landscape — the need for timely resolution and stronger technical documentation in complex technology disputes.

Indian Army Secures Patent for Indigenous Power Management System ‘Vidyut Rakshak’

by

The Indian Army has achieved a major milestone in technological innovation by securing a patent for its indigenous power management system, ‘Vidyut Rakshak.’ The device is designed to monitor, protect, and control power supply systems efficiently across diverse terrains.

A Step Toward Self-Reliance

Developed by Major Rajprasad R S, Vidyut Rakshak represents a key advancement under the government’s Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) initiative. The system reduces the Army’s dependence on imported technologies and enhances operational sustainability in critical zones.

How Vidyut Rakshak Works

Vidyut Rakshak enables real-time monitoring and control of multiple power generators and systems. It works seamlessly across various types, makes, and ratings of generators — whether modern or outdated. The innovation ensures stable power supply, detects faults instantly, and prevents equipment failures by triggering automatic protective measures.

Its integrated design allows Army personnel to track power usage and optimize resources, significantly reducing manual intervention. This is especially crucial for remote and high-altitude deployments where regular maintenance is challenging.

Enhancing Operational Efficiency

The system supports the Army’s logistical and operational networks by ensuring uninterrupted electricity for communication, surveillance, and combat operations. Vidyut Rakshak also improves fuel efficiency and minimizes generator wear and tear, saving both time and resources.

According to Army officials, the patented system has already been deployed in multiple field locations and has shown remarkable reliability in extreme weather conditions.

Indigenous Innovation in Defence Technology

The Indian Army’s successful patent filing for Vidyut Rakshak underscores its growing focus on in-house research and development. The innovation showcases the capability of military engineers to deliver cost-effective, scalable, and mission-ready technologies for field applications.

Officials noted that such indigenous solutions not only strengthen operational readiness but also promote technological sovereignty in defence infrastructure.

Towards a Smarter and Sustainable Future

The Vidyut Rakshak project reflects the Army’s broader vision of integrating smart technology into defence operations. It sets a precedent for other wings of the armed forces to pursue digital and sustainable innovations.

With this patent, the Indian Army has reinforced its commitment to innovation, resilience, and national self-reliance — marking another proud step in India’s journey toward technological independence.

Google Files Patent for Face Detection Tech to Seamlessly Activate Gemini AI

by


The new system could replace “Hey Google” with silent, face-based activation for faster and more natural AI interactions.

Google has filed a new patent for a face-detection technology designed to make its Gemini AI assistant activate automatically when a user’s face comes near the device. The innovation could eliminate the need for voice hotwords such as “Hey Google” and deliver a smoother, hands-free experience.

How the system works

The patent describes a method that uses capacitive sensors built into modern touchscreens. These sensors measure small changes in electric fields. When a face or mouth moves close to the screen, it alters the field in a recognizable way. The device can then identify this “face-near” signature and activate Gemini for a short listening window.

Unlike camera-based recognition, this approach does not rely on capturing or storing facial images. Instead, it detects proximity, ensuring faster response and lower power consumption. The patent shows that the feature can run continuously in the background without draining the battery or compromising user privacy.

Benefits for users

The new technology could make AI access more natural. Users will no longer need to say “Hey Google” or press any button. They can simply lift the phone or move closer to the screen and speak directly to Gemini.

This hands-free method could also perform better in noisy environments, where voice triggers often fail. It might prove especially useful when users are wearing masks or in situations where speaking the wake phrase is inconvenient.

A step toward ambient AI

Google’s patent aligns with its vision of ambient computing — a world where AI assistants operate seamlessly in the background. The Gemini model already powers smarter responses and generative capabilities across Google’s ecosystem. Adding face-proximity activation could make interactions even more effortless.

The system could later extend to other devices such as smart glasses, smart speakers, or in-car displays, allowing Gemini to recognize intent through presence rather than speech.

Privacy and control

Although the feature detects faces, it does not identify individual users. The system focuses on sensing movement and proximity, not identity. However, experts say Google will need to offer strong privacy controls and opt-out options when rolling out the feature. Users will expect transparency about what data is processed and how it is stored.

Challenges and concerns

Like any sensor-based system, false triggers are a risk. The assistant might activate accidentally if a hand or another object moves near the screen. The patent mentions using machine-learning filters to reduce such errors over time.

Battery optimization will also be important. Even though capacitive sensing uses less power than microphones or cameras, continuous background operation still requires efficient software design.

Patent does not guarantee release

Google’s filing does not confirm that the feature will appear in upcoming devices. Companies often patent experimental technologies to secure intellectual property before commercialization. If implemented, the face-detection trigger could debut in future Pixel smartphones or as a Gemini feature update within Android.

Conclusion

Google’s face-detection patent hints at a future where AI assistants respond intuitively — without wake words or button presses. The approach combines convenience, speed, and lower energy use. Still, its success will depend on accuracy, privacy protection, and user trust.

If brought to market, this innovation could redefine how people interact with their devices and move one step closer to truly context-aware artificial intelligence.

Genentech Wins $124 Million in Cabilly Patent Dispute Against Biogen

by

California Court Orders Biogen to Pay Royalties for Tysabri Sales

A California federal judge has ruled in favor of Genentech, awarding the Roche subsidiary $124 million in royalties from Biogen. The payment relates to the use of Genentech’s patented antibody manufacturing technology, known as the Cabilly patents.

Background of the Dispute
The Cabilly patents, developed over four decades ago, form the foundation for producing monoclonal antibodies. These antibodies are key components in drugs like Tysabri, used to treat multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease.

Genentech filed a breach of contract lawsuit in 2023. The company alleged that Biogen failed to pay royalties on Tysabri vials produced before the patents expired in December 2018 but sold afterward, with some sales extending as late as 2022.

Court Ruling and Financials
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers sided with Genentech. The court ordered Biogen to pay $88 million in royalties. An additional $36 million in interest was included, bringing the total to $124 million. The judge highlighted that such “tail royalties” are common practice in the biopharma industry.

Significance of the Cabilly Patents
The Cabilly patents have been central to multiple legal battles over the years. Notably, the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. confirmed that licensees can challenge a patent’s validity while the license is active.

This ruling emphasizes the long-lasting impact of the Cabilly patents. Licensing agreements and royalty obligations in the biopharma sector continue to hinge on these foundational patents.

Industry Impact
The decision may influence how pharmaceutical companies handle post-expiration sales and royalties. Experts note that tail royalties are critical for compensating original patent holders for continued use of their innovations.

PTAB Upholds Wireless Patent Against Nokia and Ericsson

by

The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has ruled against Nokia and Ericsson in their bid to invalidate a wireless communication patent. The decision preserves 15 key claims from U.S. Patent No. 10,715,235, which focuses on improving data transmission and reducing interference in modern wireless systems.

The ruling marks a significant win for the patent owner, reinforcing the validity of technology used in advanced communication networks.

Patent Focus: Beamforming and Signal Optimization

The patent centers on beamforming and signal management techniques that enhance communication between multiple antennas. It aims to minimize interference, strengthen data transfer, and improve overall network efficiency—core elements in 5G and future wireless infrastructure.

The PTAB concluded that Nokia and Ericsson did not present sufficient evidence to prove the patent claims were unpatentable. The Board found that the prior art references and expert testimony failed to demonstrate clear overlap with the patented invention.

PTAB Rejects Invalidity Arguments

Both telecom companies had argued that the patent’s claims were invalid due to anticipation and obviousness. However, the Board determined that the patent represented a distinct technical advancement in wireless signal processing.

This decision reflects the PTAB’s increasingly rigorous approach to inter partes review (IPR) petitions, particularly in cases involving next-generation communication technologies.

Legal and Industry Implications

The outcome limits Nokia and Ericsson’s ability to use similar invalidity arguments in any future litigation under AIA estoppel provisions. It also strengthens the patent holder’s position in ongoing and future licensing discussions, potentially increasing royalty demands.

Industry experts suggest that the ruling reinforces the importance of robust patent strategies as 5G innovation continues to expand globally. The case highlights how high-value patents in wireless communication remain key competitive assets in the telecom sector.

Broader Context: PTAB’s Changing Dynamics

The PTAB has shown a trend toward upholding more patents amid a rise in challenges from major technology firms. Recent patterns suggest a stricter review process, with the Board emphasizing the need for strong technical and evidentiary support in IPR filings.

This shift may encourage companies to pursue collaborative licensing or design-around strategies rather than relying solely on invalidity petitions to weaken competitors’ portfolios.

What’s Next for Nokia and Ericsson

Both firms are expected to evaluate their legal options, including a potential appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. However, appellate courts typically give deference to the PTAB’s technical findings, making reversals rare.

The decision is likely to influence future patent challenges involving wireless infrastructure, signal processing, and 5G deployment technologies, where innovation and patent rights remain critical to market leadership.

UK Consumer Group Takes Qualcomm to Court

by

U.S. chipmaker Qualcomm is facing a major legal challenge in the United Kingdom over alleged abuse of market dominance in its patent licensing and chip supply practices.
Consumer watchdog Which? has brought a £480 million (US$647 million) lawsuit before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in London. The group claims Qualcomm imposed unfair conditions on smartphone manufacturers, leading to inflated prices for millions of UK consumers.

According to Which?, Qualcomm’s “no licence, no chips” policy forced companies like Apple and Samsung to obtain patent licenses before they could purchase Qualcomm’s chipsets. The consumer group argues that this practice created an “industry-wide private tax”, ultimately passed on to smartphone buyers.

Read more on Reuters

Allegations of Market Abuse

The lawsuit accuses Qualcomm of abusing its dominant position in the markets for both mobile chipsets and standard-essential patents (SEPs). These SEPs are crucial for mobile communication standards such as 4G and 5G, and patent holders are generally required to license them on Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms.

Which? claims that Qualcomm violated these principles by tying chip sales to costly patent licenses. The group says this practice distorted competition and inflated royalties that device makers paid for access to Qualcomm’s technology.

Qualcomm Defends Licensing Practices

Qualcomm has denied all allegations of wrongdoing. The company argues that its licensing terms are consistent with global industry norms and that manufacturers such as Apple and Samsung possess substantial bargaining power.

A Qualcomm spokesperson said the company’s business model is lawful and has been upheld in previous court decisions. The firm pointed to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that overturned a similar case filed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which found Qualcomm’s licensing model to be legitimate under U.S. antitrust law.

Consumer Impact and Wider Implications

Which? estimates that around 29 million UK consumers who purchased iPhones or Samsung devices since 2015 were affected by Qualcomm’s practices. The lawsuit argues that inflated royalty costs were passed on to customers in the form of higher handset prices.

If the tribunal rules in favor of Which?, Qualcomm could be ordered to pay hundreds of millions in damages and alter its licensing policies in the UK. The case could also influence how standard-essential patent licensing is handled across Europe and other markets.

The trial, expected to run for five weeks, will determine whether Qualcomm’s conduct breached UK competition law. A separate hearing may follow to decide the amount of compensation if the company is found liable.

Broader Context

This case echoes regulatory scrutiny Qualcomm has faced worldwide. In 2018, the European Commission fined the firm €997 million for abusing its dominance in LTE chipsets. Similar disputes have arisen in South Korea, China, and the United States, where authorities have examined Qualcomm’s licensing policies.

A ruling against Qualcomm in the UK could set a major precedent for how tech giants manage their intellectual property and pricing models in the mobile industry.

Singapore’s AEM Faces Patent Challenge

by

Singapore-based AEM Holdings Ltd has strongly denied allegations of patent infringement filed by a U.S. semiconductor company. The complaint, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, accuses AEM of infringing patents related to advanced wafer-level testing systems.

The lawsuit reportedly focuses on patents covering wafer test systems equipped with thermal control technologies. The U.S. firm alleges that AEM’s testing solutions use similar methods without authorization.

AEM dismissed the claims, describing them as baseless and lacking merit. The company stated that it operates within international intellectual property laws and owns a strong portfolio of patents supporting its innovations.

“AEM strongly denies these allegations and believes the lawsuit lacks merit. We are confident this matter will not have a material impact on our operations,” the company said in an official SGX filing.

Sharp Decline in Share Value

Following the announcement, AEM’s stock fell by 9.3% on Tuesday as investors reacted to the legal development. The decline reflected market concerns over potential litigation costs, possible injunctions, and uncertainty surrounding the dispute’s outcome.

Analysts note that patent lawsuits in the semiconductor industry can take years to resolve and often involve high legal expenses. Even if a company ultimately prevails, the process can temporarily affect investor confidence and market performance.

This legal challenge comes at a time when global semiconductor manufacturers are ramping up innovation in testing and automation systems to meet rising chip demand. Intellectual property protection has therefore become a key competitive factor for industry players.

Implications for the Semiconductor Sector

The case highlights the growing frequency of intellectual property disputes within the semiconductor sector. As companies push the boundaries of chip testing and design technology, patent overlaps and legal confrontations have become more common.

If the court rules against AEM, it may face monetary penalties, licensing obligations, or the need to redesign affected products. However, if the company successfully defends itself, it could reaffirm the strength of its technology portfolio and restore market confidence.

Industry experts often observe that such disputes eventually lead to settlements or cross-licensing arrangements, allowing both parties to move forward without long-term disruptions.

AEM’s Response and Future Outlook

AEM confirmed that it has engaged legal counsel in the United States and intends to vigorously defend its position. The company reiterated that the case would not affect its business operations or financial performance.

AEM continues to expand its global presence in semiconductor test solutions, automation systems, and equipment engineering. The firm maintains that its technologies are independently developed and compliant with all applicable IP regulations.

The coming months will be crucial as AEM presents its defense and the court reviews the claims. The outcome will likely shape how technology companies manage and safeguard intellectual property in an increasingly competitive semiconductor landscape.