Ann: Nearmap made aware of complaint in US District Court (Utah), page-47

Finally, a good post.

The litigation against Xactware reads like a dramatic tale of espionage, deceit and a perilous disregard for court proceedings by the defendant. It's all here if anyone cares to read through it. Including the reason WHY the settlement was tripled.

https://casetext.com/case/eagleview-techs-v-xactware-sols

Eagleview in my mind are patent trolls. A quick search of Google Patents reveals over 700 results, including all the patents which are referred to in the claim against Nearmap.

The key difference in all this is a) Nearmap have a long history with intellectual property (IPernica) and know how to manage their own portfolio of patents and b) most importantly- have a patent granted in December last year which covers their roof geometry technology (https://patents.google.com/patent/US10861247B2). Again, it's all there for anyone interested in reading the entire patent.

How can a patent be granted (including reference to Eagleview technology) and then be in breach? Nearmap have an innovative step which allowed them to be granted a patent for the technological improvement and inventive step. That speaks volumes, we wouldn't be operating in the US jurisdiction without it (only referring to roof geometry, and not the core Nearmap business).

Short term the share price might suffer. Especially until we hear more commentary from management regarding the issue. Litigation like this happens all the time in the US, sometimes it gets off the ground and other times it doesn't.

Looking beneath the cloud of this litigation I read that Nearmap is making considerable ground in the US and have Eagleview quite concerned about losing more market share and more rapidly than first anticipated. This bodes well (along with the upgrade) for Nearmap. And who knows, the patent granted to Nearmap may well be preventing Eagleview from any further innovation of which they seem to be greatly lacking.