Supposing you can invalidate the patents, challenger returns with another random sampling of patents....
Eventually you 1) go broke or 2) pay up.
If the companies are evenly matched (or at least sufficiently that they could drain one another bloodless), they enter into a cross-licensing agreement.
I don't see any mention of what Google paid for the 1000 patents, but this suggests a very friendly relationship between Mountain View and Armonk.
Patents are a mass weapon.
You pursue an infringement claim against some small random sampling of patents in your portfolio.
Challengee has the option of 1) paying your fee or 2) challenging the patents.
Your average patent case cost is $3-$10 million. http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Litigation_Costs.h...
Supposing you can invalidate the patents, challenger returns with another random sampling of patents....
Eventually you 1) go broke or 2) pay up.
If the companies are evenly matched (or at least sufficiently that they could drain one another bloodless), they enter into a cross-licensing agreement.
I don't see any mention of what Google paid for the 1000 patents, but this suggests a very friendly relationship between Mountain View and Armonk.