Robert G. Badal is a partner in the firm’s Litigation/Controversy and Regulatory and Government Affairs Departments, and a member of the Antitrust Litigation, Intellectual Property Litigation and Antitrust and Competition Practice Groups, with over 35 years of antitrust, intellectual property and complex litigation experience. Mr. Badal was recognized in 2010 and 2011 by Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, by Southern California Super Lawyers from 2007-2012, and by Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition from 2009-2011, for his work in the antitrust field. He joined the firm in 2008.
Practice
Mr. Badal's practice is particularly focused on the intersection of the antitrust and intellectual property laws, and he has represented clients in a variety of litigation matters that relate to these issues. He has experience in litigation involving allegations of illegal tying arrangements, price fixing, price discrimination, predatory pricing, anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions and monopolization and attempted monopolization under both state and federal statutes.
Additionally, Mr. Badal has counseled clients on antitrust compliance and risk avoidance, with a particular focus on licensing and standard setting issues arising from the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the technology sectors. He has been involved in antitrust and copyright/patent/antitrust litigations involving, among others, companies who manufacture or distribute computer chips, peripheral equipment, applications software, proprietary OS software, computer clearinghouse services, computerized point-of-sale equipment and chemical additives. Each of these matters involved the antitrust implications raised by enforcement of intellectual property rights.
Mr. Badal’s experience includes government service as well as private practice.
Recent Highlights
Notable experience including matters prior to joining WilmerHale includes:
- Represents a large media company in an European antitrust inquiry regarding various license terms and conditions related to content distribution.
- Represents Shelter Capital Partners in litigation involving the DMCA and the application of contributory infringement doctrines to venture capital investors in internet start-ups.
- Represents Korea Kumho Petrochemical Company in antitrust action involving alleged monopolization in rubber chemicals industry.
- Represented Asiana Airlines in MDL class action civil litigations involving alleged price fixing in the air cargo business.
- Provided counseling to large company engaged in data gathering business regarding compliance issues raised by the Federal Trade Commission Act.
- Provided counseling to large media company with regard to licensing issues associated with 2008 Olympics in Beijing, China.
- Provided counseling advice to a large technology company regarding antitrust implications raised by conduct associated with industry standard setting organizations.
- Obtained $19.2 million judgment in federal bench trial on behalf of Warner Bros. Entertainment against Golden Channels for breach of license agreements.
- Obtained $8.3 million decision in contested arbitration on behalf of media company for breach of distribution agreement.
- Obtained $1 million decision on counterclaim filed on behalf of respondent in contested arbitration over distribution rights to legacy television script.
- Obtained attorneys' fees award for respondent in successfully defeating claim in contested arbitration.
- Represented technology company in disputes regarding licensing rights to core software technologies.
- Represented international television and international theatrical distribution divisions of major studio in international licensing disputes.
- Represented The Walt Disney Company’s Buena Vista Home Entertainment division in the Merchant v. Redstone antitrust litigation filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court as a class action against Blockbuster Video and various studios on behalf of independent video retail stores. The plaintiffs alleged that certain pricing differentials offered to video retailers by the defendants constituted violations of California’s Cartwright, Unfair Practices and Unfair Competition (B.P.C. § 17200) Unfair Practice (pre-documentation) statutes.
- Represented a national advertiser with regard to a variety of issues related to licensing and copyright infringement disputes.
- Represented Gemstar-TV Guide/Star Sight Telecast in a number of litigations raising the antitrust implications under Section 1 and Section 2 of the Sherman Act of enforcement of patent rights.
- Represented an Internet company with regard to alleged copyright infringement of database content and materials.
- Represented GEAC Computer Corp., Ltd. against allegations by an ISO of illegal monopoly and tying for refusal to extend license in potential and copyrighted software to refurbished computer systems.
- Represented Destec Energy Corporation, Dynegy Power Corporation and others in Cartwright Act and Sherman Act Section 2 monopoly claims against unregulated portions of public utility’s gas transmissions business.
- Represented Thule SA/Thule America in a lawsuit alleging Sherman Act Section 1 boycott and Section 2 attempted monopoly claims for creation of an independent trade show to compete with an established trade show.
- Represented Teleflora LLC against competing floral clearinghouse and wire service under “essential facilities” doctrine.
- Represented a corporate client in litigation over copyright implications where ownership of domain name and trade name were held by two separate entities.
- Represented a major media company in an issue of preemption under the federal Copyright Act of plaintiffs’ state law-based claims alleged as contract and tort theories.
- Represented TheBrain Technologies Corporation against NBCi and SNAP, Inc. in trademark infringement action related to the use of Internet search engine trade names.
- Represented Mitsubishi Electric Company, Ltd. in Sherman Act Section 1 boycott and Section 2 attempted monopoly claims related to alleged refusal to adopt dual-deck VCR technologies.
- Represented Mitsubishi Electric Company, Ltd. in Sherman Act Section 2 claims related to alleged attempted monopoly in sale of computer chips and chip sets.
Professional Activities
Mr. Badal is a member of the American Bar Association, District of Columbia Bar Association, California Bar Association and the Los Angeles County Bar Association (he previously served on the Executive Committee of the Antitrust Section). He is a member of the Planning Committee and the Executive Committee of the USC Gould School of Law's Intellectual Property Institute and has been on the Planning Committee since its inception in 2004. He is a Board Member and Past President of the Board of Directors of Bet Tzedek Legal Services and was a member of the Board of Governors of The Music Center of Los Angeles. He served as Co-Chair of The Music Center’s Long Range Planning Committee, as a member of its Finance Committee and Development Committee, and Chair of the Individual Giving Committee. He was also a member of the Board of Trustees, Finance Committee and Development Committee for the Marlborough School from 1999 to 2004.
Publications
- "9th Circuit Extends IP Protections to Web Hosts", Los Angeles Daily Journal, p. 4, Wednesday, February 8, 2012
- “The Redbox Antitrust Litigation: Should Copyright Owners Be Concerned ?”, Los Angeles Lawyer, May 2010
- “The FTC’s Continuing Challenge to Reverse Payment Patent Settlements in the Pharmaceutical Industry”, (editor), BNA Pharmaceutical Law & Industry, June 2009
- “Speculation, Overdeterrence and Consumer Standing in Walker Process Litigation: A Response to Professor Leslie” – Southwestern Law Journal – 2007
- Hearing Issues – Effective Advocacy/The Use of Party-Appointed Arbitrators in Tripartite Panels – March 26, 2007
- “Setting A Higher Standard: The FTC Takes A Tougher Stand On The Ways IP Owners Try To Influence Standard-Setting Organizations” – ABA's Intellectual Property Committee Newsletter – November 1, 2006
- “From Magill to Microsoft: Is the European Union's Insistence on Compulsory Licensing of Intellectual Property Rights a Threat to Innovation?” – Antitrust & Intellectual Property – October 1, 2004
- Co-Author, “Merging Traffic: The Intersection Between Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property Right” – IP Litigator – July 2, 2003
- “A Continental Divide: How the United States and the European Union Differ in Their Antitrust Treatment of a Firm's Unilateral Refusal to License Intellectual Property” – Antitrust & Intellectual Property – July 1, 2003
- “A Growing Suspicion Over the Validity of Shrinkwrap Licensing” – July 1, 2003
- "Be Careful What You Ask For: When Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Trigger Potential Antitrust Exposure” – 7th Annual Intellectual Property Institute – June 29, 2003
- “U.S. Company Compelled to License Its Software by E.U. Antitrust Authorities” – March 1, 2002
- “Economic Testimony Under Fire” – ABA Journal – 2001
- “Preparing for Daubert Challenges in Antitrust Cases” – Antitrust Section, ABA Newsletter – 2001
- “Restrictive State Laws and the Federal Trade Commission” – 29 Administrative Law Review 239
Speaking Engagements
- "Single Firm Behavior in the IP Context" (moderator), USC Gould School of Law Intellectual Property Institute – Los Angeles, California – March 2010
- “Consumer Standing for Walker Process Litigation,” Commentator, A Symposium in Celebration of the Work of Lawrence A. Sullivan – Southwestern Law School – February 23, 2007
- “Hearing Issues – Effective Advocacy/The Use of Party-Appointed Arbitrators in Tripartite Panels,” Arbitrating the Mega-Case Workshop – Los Angeles, California – March 2007
- “Antitrust and IP: Case Studies,” USC Gould School of Law, Adjunct Professor of Law co-taught with Professor Gillian Hadfield – Spring 2006
- “The Antitrust Risks Raised by Standard Setting Activities,” USC Gould School of Law Intellectual Property Institute – Los Angeles, California – May 2005
- “The Tension Between Antitrust Obligations and IP Rights: Where to Draw the Line?,” USC Gould School of Law Intellectual Property Institute – Los Angeles, California – May 2004
- “Expert Testimony in the Aftermath of Daubert and Kuhmo,” The Tenth Annual Golden State Antitrust and Unfair Competition Institute – April 2003
