Arista Networks will pay US$400 million to Cisco Systems to resolve a US court fight between the two network equipment makers, Arista said in a regulatory filing on Monday, August 6, the day a jury trial in the dispute was scheduled to begin, reported Reuters.
The settlement resolved lawsuits filed by Cisco more than three years ago that alleged Arista Networks copied its intellectual property. Arista denied infringing Cisco’s patents, but had been modifying its networking software to resolve issues. The companies issued a joint statement that said: “with limited exceptions, no new litigation will be brought over patents or copyrights related to existing products, for five years.”
Founded in 2004 by former Cisco engineers, Arista has emerged as a rival to Cisco in the multibillion-dollar market for ethernet switches used in data centers.
Cisco sued Arista in 2014, alleging it copied software that runs switching products and other technology protected by patents and copyrights. Arista has denied the allegations and accused Cisco of a smear campaign intended to stifle competition.
The US International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled in 2016 that Arista infringed three patents and recommended a limited ban on Arista’s products that infringed the patents.
Arista stated that in an effort to comply with the ITC’s ruling, it redesigned its technology to remove elements found to infringe Cisco’s patents.
In related, but separate, litigation, Arista won a jury verdict in 2016 that it owed no damages to Cisco over copyright infringement. This ruling is still under appeal in a federal court and a resolution is expected later in the year.
Full Content: Reuters
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand