Google unmasks patent accuser

Google Inc wanted to find out who was behind a company called Suffolk Technologies LLC that accused the world's largest search engine's owner of using its internet-search technology without permission.

Turns out, the tangled ownership history included big names: Goldman Sachs Group Inc and BT Group Plc's British Telecom.

Tired of fighting sometimes frivolous patent-infringement suits that cost millions of dollars in legal fees, companies such as Google and Apple Inc are using ownership questions to help their court cases. Unveiling litigants can get a suit dismissed, disclose the real entity behind a case or identify a target for revenge. Even before Suffolk lost its case, Google retaliated last year by filing a patent-infringement suit against British Telecom.

"You would think that determining who owns a patent is a pretty straightforward process," said Stephen Korniczky, co-chairman of the intellectual property practice of Sheppard Mullin in Del Mar, California. "If a patent is assigned to a company, then it's recorded with the patent office. The problem really lies in who owns the company or entity to whom the patents have been assigned."

Google, Cisco Systems and other technology companies have persuaded Congress to consider legislation requiring patent owners to disclose the "real party in interest." The US Patent and Trademark Office is considering rules to make public the "attributable ownership" of a patent. It will hold hearings on the proposal today in Alexandria, Virginia, and March 26 in San Francisco. The challenge may be figuring out what those terms mean and what information must be disclosed.

Revealing who controls a patent is becoming a key issue in more infringement lawsuits as the market to buy and sell patents grows and ownership issues get murkier. Big companies hide behind little-known firms to avoid countersuits. Investment companies don't want it to be known that they're involved in patent litigation. And some patent owners keep portfolios separate to file multiple lawsuits against a company over different technology.