—ACS And Leadscope Settle Case “Trade Secrets: Society to pay $22.6 million to software firm to settle intellectual property case that spanned a decade” The American Chemical Society and Leadscope Inc. and its three founders have reached a settlement in their long-running intellectual property dispute. ACS, which publishes C&EN, has agreed to pay Leadscope and its three founders $22.6 million to settle and resolve all claims associated with American Chemical Society v. Leadscope Inc. The settlement, which was announced on Oct. 5, also makes clear that all parties agree that “all right, title, interest, and ownership in the Leadscope software and products that were the subject of the litigation belong exclusively to Leadscope.”
by Susan R. Morrissey | October 10, 2012
—ACS Loses Appeal of Leadscope Case “Intellectual Property: Ohio court of appeals affirms Leadscope's counterclaims against society” The American Chemical Society has lost round two of its intellectual property dispute with Leadscope Inc., a Columbus, Ohio, based chemical informatics company. An Ohio appeals court, in a strongly worded decision released on June 15, upheld all counts against ACS that were determined by a jury in a 2008 lower court ruling (C&EN Online Latest News, March 28, 2008).
by William G. Schulz | June 17, 2010
—ACS, Leadscope Square Off “Intellectual Property: Arguments before Ohio Supreme Court may finally put to rest ACS’s fight with Leadscope” The seven justices of the Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Sept. 7 in another effort by attorneys for the American Chemical Society to reverse decisions by lower courts in its intellectual property dispute with Leadscope Inc.
by William G. Schulz | September 12, 2011
The legal battle stretches back to 2002, when ACS brought suit against Leadscope and three former ACS employees who founded the company: Paul E. Blower Jr., Wayne P. Johnson, and Glenn J. Myatt. All three had worked in ACS's Chemical Abstracts Service Division. In the original suit, ACS alleged that the defendants improperly used ACS's intellectual property to develop, patent, and market Leadscope software products.
by William G. Schulz | August 09, 2010
According to court documents, ACS failed to show “that it possessed anything more than speculation at the time it filed its lawsuit that PathFinder had been misappropriated by Leadscope.” ACS “offered no concrete evidence that Leadscope stole its product. ... The jury could reasonably infer, based on the paucity of evidence presented, that the lawsuit was objectively baseless when filed.” “Leadscope, on the other hand, presented persuasive evidence that ACS had an intent to harm its business as its motivation in filing the lawsuit.” The venture capitalist that Leadscope was hoping would provide funding was said to be “uncomfortable moving forward” with investment until the issues with ACS “were cleared up.” The jury found that ACS had damaged Leadscope in the millions of dollars, and the appellate courts agreed. The damages for defamation were remanded for further consideration, but the liability of ACS was confirmed in all of the courts. This was not a qualified victory for ACS. John P. Sutton Grass Valley, Calif.
November 12, 2012
Leadscope Inc.” After years of litigation and acrimony between the combatants, the Ohio Supreme Court on Sept. 18 released a split decision on the intellectual property dispute American Chemical Society v. Leadscope Inc. The high court partially affirmed and partially reversed rulings by Ohio's 10th District Court of Appeals that upheld a trial court's award of $26.5 million in civil damages to software start-up firm Leadscope Inc. and its three founders against ACS for alleged unfair business practices and defamation.
by William G. Schulz | September 21, 2012
—ACS Posts Online Review Of Leadscope Case “A comprehensive explanation gives the public access to the history and ramifications of the case” A detailed explanation of the American Chemical Society v. Leadscope Inc. intellectual property suit—finally settled in late September (C&EN, Oct. 15, 2012, page 8)—has been posted online by ACS (www.acs.org/leadscopeqa).
by William G. Schulz, Sophie L. Rovner | January 07, 2013