Big Corporate Lawsuits Infographics

BIG CORPORATE LAWSUITS Corporate litigation often risky and financially draining but also potentially very profitable 40% 40% 70% of corporate counsel can't quantify what it will cost to of companies in litiga- Litigation costs represent tion had lawsuits against more than 70% of overall defend a pending lawsuit them in which more than legal spending by the $20 million is at stake average U.S. business. Corporate lawsuits are widely prevalent Patent Trolls The average company in the U.S. juggles R PATENTED 目 目 目 目 目 S7 LAWSUITS SIMULTANEOUSLY Known as "patent trolls," non-practicing entities or patent-assertion entities are companies that own patent rights for products they do not manufacture 74% or use and primarily profit of large companies initiated a lawsuit in the past year. through patent lawsuits Frivolous and Surprising Lawsuits Liebeck vs McDonald's 79 year old Stelle Liebeck sued McDonald's when she spilled Liebeck initially sought to settle her their hot coffee on herself claim for $20,000 but they refused ZO0 She ultimately won her suit by providing evidence of more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee and McDonald's own quality she suffered GLAIMS third degree burns resulting in an 8 day hospital stay assurance manager testimony admitting and skin grafts that there was a serious burn hazard PAYOUT: A jury found McDonald's 80% responsible, awarding Liebeck $160.000 in compensatory damages and $480,000 in punitive damages Skechers vs Federal Trade Commission The Federal Trade Commission SKECHERS brought the company to court for: MARKETING EXECUTIVES • False health improvement claims (improve heart rate, increase calorie burn, etc.) EMPLOYEE EXECUTIVE Skechers' pricey ShapeUp shoes promised extra • Failing to disclose that a chiro- calories burned practor featured in one of their ads and muscle tone was not only a Skechers employee, but was married to one of the • Tagline "Get in Shape With- out Setting Foot in a Gym" just by walking in the shoes. company's marketing executives PAYOUT: Sketchers settled out of court for $40 million and consumers could apply for a full refund at the FTC website Leonard vs Pepsi Co. According to contest rules, pepsi points could be pur- PEPSI chased for 10 cents each. A viewer collected 15 points - through purchases and then mailed in a check for BREACH OF CONTRACT In 1999, Pepsi aired a $700,008. 50 to Pepsi for commercial in which the remaining points. a Harrier fighter jet was shown to be redeemable for 7 million pepsi points When Pepsi re fused to deliver a Harrier fighter jet (which cost well over $20-30 million | $700,008.50 XXXX-XXXXXX-XXXXXXKX each), the viewer sued for nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnnnnnn breach of contract and fraud PAYOUT: The court ruled in Pepsi's favor, ruling that no reasonable person could think the commercial actually offered a jet for $700,000. Ayala vs Wendy's Anna Ayala 1.5 in claimed she The story was found a 1.5 inch taken to the press Wenny's human fingertip and widely circu- F-- in her lated before a Wendy's chili. lawsuit was filed. Ayala dropped the lawsuit when investigations began looking for the PAYOUT: source of the missing finger and eventually determined she had planted it. Wendy's filed a criminal complaint and Ayala and her husband were sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Patent & Trademark Lawsuits SAMSUNG Apple Inc vs Samsung 2013 In 2013, Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung regarding a pinch-to-zoom patent for touch screens. The US Patent and Trademark Office rejected the claim for its "pinch-to-zoom" technology. 2012 - Apple won a suit of $1.0 5 billion (minus $450 million later cut by the judge for miscalculations) in damages against Samsung The verdict covered 14 products determined to have Apple-patented fea- tures such as the "bounce-back" when you scroll to the end of a list, dou- ble-tap zoom and design iconography on iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches The patent infringement case was being tried in other countries as well; in South Korea, the courts ruled that both had infringed on each other's patents, giving a split decision and effectively banning some older products from both companies from the Korean market 00 Apple Inc vs Apple Corps BEĂTLES 888 THE In 1978, Apple Corps, The Beatles' holding company, filed a lawsuit against Apple Computer for trademark infringement. In 1981, an $80,000 settlement determined that Apple Inc would not enter the music business and Apple Corps would not get involved in the computer business. The lawsuit filings were renewed in 1986 over violating the agreement when Apple computers added recording capabilities - reaching a new $26.5 m illion REC settlement in 1991. When iTunes launched in 2003, Apple Corps sued yet against for breach of contract $$$ • Apple Inc paid Apple Corps $500 million to gain ow nership of all "Apple" trademarks and licensing certain trademarks to Apple Corps • It took another few more years before they finally reached an agreement iTunes allowing The Beatles' music to be made available for purchase on iTunes ORACLE Google Oracle vs Google ÎT Java Oracle sought $6 billion in damages in a copyright battle with Google over the use of Java programming language and software tools. Ultimately, a jury decided that Google did not infringe on Oracle's Java patents. $1.13 MIL Oracle was also ordered to reimburse Google for $1.13 million in legal costs %24 Nestlē Cadbury Nestlé vs Cadbury 2006 In 2006, Nestlé trademarked the shape of the KitKat Cadbury applied to invalidate the trademark under the claim that a product shape cannot be trademarked. Nestlé ultimately won the trademark lawsuit in the UK, confirming that others cannot sell a KitKat shaped product in the European Union. Coca-Cola Cocaine Coca-Cola vs Cocaine TM A trademark application was filed in Chile by Redux Beverages for "Cocaine" after an energy drink they sell called Cocaine Energy loaded with 280mg of caffeine per can, 3.5 times stronger than other energy drinks. In 2011, Coca-Cola filed an opposition to the trademark application for "Co- caine" claiming that the trademark would lead to confusion with its own Coke brand. Additionally, one of the flavors, Spicy Hot Cocaine, is marketed in a red can with a white logo, similar to Coca-Cola's can. SOURCES http://mashable.com http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/justice/hs.xsl/2011.htm http://listverse.com/2009/01/28/top-10-bizarre-or-frivolous-lawsuits http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/02/nestle-lawsuit_n_2395583.html http://www.mandatory.com/2012/08/09/the-10-biggest-american-lawsuit-settlements/1 https://www.legalzoom.com/lawsuits-settlements/personal-injury/top-ten-frivolous-lawsuits http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ten-dumbest-lawsuits-against-big-business-2009-11?op3D1 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/07/14/business/Patent-Lawsuits-Get-in-Line.html?_r=0 http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1996/aug/09/pentagon-says-sorry-you-cant-buy-jet-in-pepsi-ad http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/has-patent-will-sue-an-alert-to-corporate-america.html http://www.intellectualpropertynews.com/trademark-news/coca-cola-opposes-cocaine-trademarks-in-chile/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/mu- sic-news/8136469/Apple-vs-Apple-long-running-legal-dispute-delayed-Beatles-iTunes-deal.html http://www.corporateservicecenter.com/nevada-inc-whitepapers_files/288d913762ca4df36bdflaf0e7804ef4-0.php -Cocaine· Cocaine· -Cocaine -Cocaine· + CocaCola