Global Patent Wars: How Big Tech Uses Invalidations to Kill Competition

Gaurav Khandelwal
11 minutes ago
2 min read

In the rapidly changing technology landscape, intellectual property (IP) is one of the most potent weapons. Every smartphone, app, or chip has a thick thicket of patents that set the boundaries of innovation. But over the past two decades, "patent invalidation" has become a dubious strategy — especially for Big Tech titans such as Apple, Samsung, Google, and Microsoft — to squash smaller players or neutralize the heat from competitors.

Welcome to the world of international patent battles, where courtroom combat is every bit as fierce as marketplace competition.

What Are Patent Invalidations?

Patent invalidation is a legal tactic employed to invalidate an established patent. If implemented, it makes the patent unenforceable. Major companies tend to employ this to debase smaller competitors, eliminate legal obstacles, or forego paying expensive licensing fees.

This may sound like a brilliant legal tactic, but applied aggressively, it can dampen competition, prevent innovation, and establish an unfair market advantage in the tech environment.

Apple vs. Samsung: The Billion-Dollar Battle

One of the most celebrated patent wars ever is the Apple-Samsung legal case. The battle started in 2011 when Apple sued Samsung for their imitation of the iPhone design and feature. After a series of lawsuits in several nations and billions of damages awarded, the two companies agreed to settle in 2018.

But more intriguing is the way each party tried to invalidate the other's patents.

Apple tried to invalidate Samsung's hardware patents, while Samsung sought to invalidate Apple's design and software patents.

The legal approach wasn't only about protecting IP — it was also about remaining in control of the smartphone market.

This case illustrated how large tech companies wield patent invalidation as a weapon of attack rather than defense.

The TikTok Factor: ByteDance Under Siege

Another new frontline is the US-China technology competition, with firms like ByteDance (TikTok's parent company) under the spotlight. Various US companies and lobby groups have forced Chinese technology patents to be invalidated on the grounds of ambiguous definitions or prior art.

Consequently, Chinese firms have begun aggressively filing patents in the US, EU, and India frequently being met by invalidity petitions by incumbent players seeking to slow their international growth.

This shows how patent invalidation is increasingly incorporated into international tech diplomacy, rather than mere business strategy.

Google and the Open Source Conundrum

Google has been confronted with a number of patent issues in its Android OS. Patent trolls and smaller companies typically sue the tech giant, but Google has retaliated by invalidating patents using the USPTO's Inter Partes Review (IPR) process.

But critics state that Google's zealous application of invalidation techniques has made it difficult for small programmers to defend their inventions. Even when a patent is sound, the expense of defending it from a tech giant tends to result in settlements or withdrawals.

Microsoft vs. TomTom: A Quiet But Powerful Message

In 2009, Microsoft sued GPS company TomTom of the Netherlands for infringing FAT32 file system patents. TomTom also countersued, but in the end, Microsoft invalidated TomTom's defensive patents. While this case did not grab as much attention, the message was clear: do not mess with the giants.

Analysts consider this a textbook instance of invalidation used to scare and dominate market narratives particularly in areas such as software and hardware integration.

How Big Tech Exploits Patent Systems

There are a number of legal instruments Big Tech employs in order to launch invalidations:

1.Inter Partes Review (IPR) – A post-grant review procedure under the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that allows anyone to challenge the validity of a patent.

2.Opposition proceedings within the EU – Utilized by large corporations to stall or demolish patents of emerging competitors.

Re-examination in China and India

Becoming increasingly popular among technology companies targeting Asian markets.

These instruments are not malicious in and of themselves, but their abuse has set off alarm bells for antitrust officials and IP rights monitors.

The Real Victims: Startups and Small Innovators

Start-ups and smaller technology companies usually do not have the means to defend themselves when their patents are attacked by giants with deep pockets. One invalidation trial can cost more than $500,000 — an impossibly high amount for many start-up companies.

Most sell their IP, withdraw from the market, or sign onerous licensing agreements to stay in business.

This has a chilling effect: Why create if your creation is easily invalidated?

What Can Be Done?

To bring balance back in the IP marketplace, some reforms are proposed:

Higher requirements for filing invalidation petitions, particularly to avoid repeat or abusive filings.

Accelerated protection avenues for small inventors and start-ups.

Global cooperation in IP rights to avoid "forum shopping" — selecting patent offices with the most permissive laws for strategic invalidations.

Regulators and governments are now taking notice. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and European Commission are aggressively examining how IP litigation is employed to manipulate markets.

Final Thoughts

Patent wars are not merely legal battles they are fights over the future of innovation. While Big Tech's deployment of patent invalidations at times makes way for superior technologies, widespread abuse of this tactic often destroys competition, stifles creativity, and concentrates power in the hands of a select few.

With the world becoming more digital, engagement rules for patents need to be rewritten. Until that time, however, the war continues — in courtrooms, offices, and innovation laboratories around the world.