Source: IPWatchdog

The $170 million jury verdict against GoDaddy in its dispute with Express Mobile remains central to the piece, even though the court later set aside the jury’s willfulness finding. Express Mobile, Inc. v. GoDaddy.com, LLC is used as a contemporary example of patent risk management under the post-Halo Electronics v Pulse Electronics framework, which grants courts broader discretion to impose enhanced damages for egregious conduct. The discussion emphasizes that once a company becomes aware of potentially relevant patents, the company’s response — investigating, documenting defenses, and evaluating options — can materially affect litigation posture and exposure.

The article summarizes practical lessons and recommendations: the law does not mandate exhaustive Freedom to Operate reviews at every product stage, but awareness changes the analysis and inaction can become costly. According to post-trial briefing cited, Express Mobile argued GoDaddy knew of the asserted patents for years yet delayed meaningful investigation and good-faith non-infringement or invalidity positions until litigation. The piece advises companies to adopt timely, well-documented response processes, to balance investigation with attorney-client privilege, to avoid fragmented communications, and to favor structured systems that demonstrate responsible handling of known patent risks rather than perfection.