Technology & IP-related disputes

Our ADR services address the full spectrum of technology and intellectual property disputes, including but not limited to:

• Patent disputes – Conflicts involving the infringement, validity, and enforceability of utility patents, design patents, and plant patents across all technology sectors – from pharmaceuticals and biotechnology to semiconductors, telecommunications, software, and mechanical engineering. Patent disputes may involve claim construction (Markman analysis), infringement analysis (literal infringement and the doctrine of equivalents), invalidity defenses (prior art, obviousness, lack of enablement), unenforceability (inequitable conduct), damages calculations (reasonable royalty, lost profits), and injunctive relief. Patent litigation in federal court is among the most expensive and time-consuming forms of civil litigation. ADR – particularly arbitration – provides a confidential, expert-driven alternative where technically trained neutrals can evaluate claim scope, review prior art, and assess damages with far greater efficiency than a multi-year court proceeding.

• Trade secret disputes – Claims of misappropriation of trade secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and state trade secret statutes (Uniform Trade Secrets Act), including disputes over the identification and scope of protectable trade secrets, the adequacy of reasonable measures to maintain secrecy, allegations of misappropriation through improper acquisition, disclosure, or use, and remedies including injunctive relief, damages, and exemplary damages for willful misappropriation. Trade secret disputes frequently arise in the context of employee departures, competitive hiring, vendor and partner relationships, and corporate acquisitions. ADR is particularly well-suited to trade secret disputes because confidentiality is paramount – the very information at the center of the dispute must be protected from public disclosure during the resolution process, something that litigation in open court cannot guarantee.

• Trademark and brand disputes – Conflicts involving trademark infringement, dilution, counterfeiting, trade dress infringement, false designation of origin, cybersquatting (UDRP and ACPA claims), and disputes over the registration, opposition, and cancellation of trademark rights. Trademark disputes implicate brand identity and consumer perception, and they frequently arise between competitors, licensors and licensees, franchisors and franchisees, and companies operating in adjacent markets. ADR provides a confidential, efficient process for resolving brand disputes – including the negotiation of coexistence agreements, licensing arrangements, and phase-out schedules – without the negative publicity that trademark litigation often generates.

• Copyright disputes – Claims of copyright infringement, fair use defenses, disputes over copyright ownership (work-for-hire, joint authorship, assignment), and conflicts over the scope of copyright licenses in software, digital content, music, film, publishing, architecture, and other creative works. Copyright disputes in the digital age increasingly involve issues of online content distribution, digital rights management (DRM), platform liability (DMCA safe harbors), and the application of copyright law to emerging technologies (AI-generated content, NFTs, user-generated content). ADR provides a flexible forum for resolving copyright disputes with neutrals who understand both the legal framework and the industry practices of the relevant creative or technology sector.

• Software and technology licensing disputes – Conflicts arising from the interpretation, performance, or breach of software licenses, SaaS agreements, technology licensing deals, open-source license compliance, and platform access agreements. Common issues include disputes over license scope and usage rights, audit and compliance obligations, royalty calculations, sublicensing rights, support and maintenance obligations, and the consequences of license termination or expiration. Software licensing disputes frequently involve technical evidence about how software is used, deployed, and integrated – evidence that benefits from evaluation by neutrals with technology industry expertise rather than a generalist court.

• Technology development and implementation disputes – Conflicts arising from custom software development contracts, system integration projects, IT outsourcing agreements, cloud migration projects, ERP implementations, and other technology development and deployment engagements. Common issues include disputes over project scope and specifications, milestone deliverables, acceptance testing, code quality, performance standards, project delays and cost overruns, and the allocation of responsibility for implementation failures. These disputes frequently involve hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in development costs, significant business disruption, and complex technical evidence about system architecture, development methodologies, and performance benchmarks. ADR provides a technically informed, efficient process for resolving these disputes with neutrals who understand software development practices, agile and waterfall methodologies, and the commercial realities of technology projects.

• Data privacy and cybersecurity disputes – Conflicts arising from data breaches, unauthorized data collection, violations of privacy statutes (CCPA, BIPA, HIPAA, GDPR), disputes over data ownership and data sharing agreements, cyber insurance coverage disagreements, and liability allocation among technology vendors, cloud providers, and their customers following a security incident. Data privacy disputes involve rapidly evolving regulatory frameworks, complex technical forensic evidence, and significant reputational and regulatory exposure. ADR provides a confidential, flexible forum for resolving these disputes without the public exposure that litigation and regulatory proceedings create.

• Standard-essential patent (SEP) and FRAND disputes – Conflicts involving patents declared essential to industry standards (Wi-Fi, cellular/5G, video compression, Bluetooth) and the obligation to license those patents on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. SEP disputes raise unique issues at the intersection of patent law, antitrust law, and standard-setting organization (SSO) policies – including FRAND royalty rate determination, licensing base selection, anti-suit injunctions, and global portfolio licensing. ADR – particularly arbitration – is increasingly recognized as the most efficient mechanism for resolving SEP/FRAND disputes, as it allows for the determination of global license terms by a single tribunal rather than piecemeal litigation across multiple jurisdictions.

• Domain name and internet disputes – Conflicts over the registration and use of internet domain names, including cybersquatting claims under the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP), the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), and disputes over country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs). Domain name disputes are routinely resolved through ADR – the UDRP process administered by WIPO and other providers is one of the most successful examples of ADR in any field of law. Our neutrals bring deep experience in domain name dispute resolution and the intersection of trademark law and internet governance.

• Artificial intelligence and emerging technology disputes – An increasingly significant category of disputes arising from the development, deployment, and commercialization of AI systems, machine learning models, autonomous systems, and other emerging technologies. Issues include disputes over AI model ownership and licensing, training data rights and copyright implications, algorithmic bias and liability, performance guarantees for AI-powered products, and the allocation of responsibility when autonomous systems cause harm or fail to perform as specified. ADR provides a forward-looking, expert-driven process for resolving these novel disputes with neutrals who understand the technical, commercial, and regulatory dimensions of emerging technology.

• Open-source software disputes – Conflicts over compliance with open-source software licenses (GPL, LGPL, Apache, MIT, BSD), including disputes over copyleft obligations, contribution rights, patent grants, and the implications of incorporating open-source code into proprietary products. Open-source disputes can have significant commercial consequences, potentially requiring the release of proprietary source code or the redesign of products. ADR provides a confidential process for resolving these technically complex disputes with neutrals who understand open-source licensing frameworks, development communities, and software architecture.

• E-commerce and digital platform disputes – Conflicts arising from the operation of digital marketplaces and platforms, including disputes over platform terms of service, seller/developer account suspensions, app store policies, payment processing, advertising practices, algorithmic ranking and visibility, and the allocation of liability for user-generated content. As digital platforms become central to commerce and communication, these disputes are growing in volume and commercial significance. ADR provides a fast, scalable resolution mechanism suited to the pace of digital business.

Technology and IP litigation is among the most expensive, complex, and time-consuming forms of civil litigation in the United States. Patent cases alone average $3 million to $5 million in legal costs for each side through trial, and complex technology contract disputes can involve terabytes of electronic discovery. ADR offers a fundamentally superior approach:

• Speed – Most technology mediations conclude in one to three sessions. Arbitrations typically resolve within six to twelve months – delivering outcomes while the technology is still current, the market opportunity still exists, and the competitive landscape has not shifted beyond recognition.

• Cost efficiency – ADR eliminates or dramatically reduces the costs of electronic discovery, expert depositions, Markman hearings, motion practice, and trial preparation. For technology companies – especially startups and mid-market firms – this means dispute resolution costs that are proportionate to the stakes involved, not costs that consume the entire R&D budget.

• Confidentiality – Technology and IP disputes involve some of the most sensitive information any company possesses – source code, product roadmaps, algorithms, customer data, trade secrets, licensing terms, and competitive strategies. ADR keeps these matters entirely private, protecting competitive advantages that public litigation would expose.

• Technical expertise – Parties can select mediators and arbitrators with deep technical backgrounds – engineers, computer scientists, patent attorneys, former USPTO examiners, technology industry executives – who can understand the technology at issue without the lengthy tutorial process that jury trials require. This expertise leads to faster, better-informed proceedings and more technically sound outcomes.

• Preservation of business relationships – Technology disputes frequently arise between parties with ongoing or potential future business relationships – licensors and licensees, vendors and customers, development partners, and companies operating in the same technology ecosystem. ADR’s less adversarial approach can preserve these relationships, while patent or trade secret litigation typically destroys them.

• Global enforceability – International arbitration awards are enforceable in over 170 countries under the New York Convention, making ADR the mechanism of choice for cross-border technology and IP disputes involving multinational companies, global supply chains, and international licensing programs.

• Flexibility – ADR procedures can be adapted to the specific needs of technology disputes – including provisions for source code review in secure environments, technical expert presentations, live technology demonstrations, and phased proceedings that address liability and damages separately.

• Finality – Binding arbitration awards are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act and subject to only very limited judicial review, providing the certainty that technology companies need to make business decisions about products, licensing, and market strategy.

• Unified global resolution – For disputes involving global patent portfolios, international licensing programs, or worldwide technology deployments, arbitration can resolve all issues in a single proceeding – avoiding the duplicative, inconsistent, and enormously expensive parallel litigation across multiple jurisdictions that technology companies otherwise face.