> As Reuters reported on Monday, the reasoning boils down to this: according to the judge, Sonos wrongly linked a pair of patent applications in 2019 to a much earlier provisional application from 2006 in an attempt to claim “a priority date before Google’s disclosures and product releases” that would thus put Google under “a cloud of infringement.” Sonos is also said to have discreetly made amendments to the documents, which greatly frustrated the judge.
If this is true, Sonos needs to be punished for such behavior. They clearly abused the patent system for their benefit, I'm surprised this wasn't brought up during the initial trial. Maybe it was, but I don't recall anyone discussing it.
If this is true, Sonos needs to be punished for such behavior. They clearly abused the patent system for their benefit, I'm surprised this wasn't brought up during the initial trial. Maybe it was, but I don't recall anyone discussing it.