直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

On Remand, Federal Circuit Affirms Akamai’s $45.4M Lost Profits Damages from Limelight

November 18, 2015

Authored and Edited by Gracie K. Mills; Elizabeth D. Ferrill; Lauren J. Dreyer

In the most recent installment of Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks, Nos. 09-1372, 09-1380, 09-1416, 09-1417 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2015), the Federal Circuit unanimously approved a calculation of Akamai’s damages based on lost profits, remanding for reinstatement of the jury’s $45.4 million damages award.

Akamai’s expert calculated Akamai’s lost profits by assuming that at least some of the customers purchasing Limelight’s infringing product would, absent infringement, have purchased Akamai’s product instead. Limelight challenged this assumption, arguing that a significant price disparity between the products—Akamai’s product was twice the price of Limelight’s—would have deterred Limelight’s customers from turning to Akamai’s product. But the Federal Circuit found the lost profits analysis sound, reasoning that Akamai’s expert had accounted for this price disparity by excluding the lowest-earning 25% of Limelight’s customers and discounting the lost profits for price elasticity.

Tags

lost profits

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2015 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Lecture

IPIC/McGill Summer IP Course 2026: Understanding Trademarks

July 14, 2026

Montreal

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

Lecture

Munich Licensing Summer Course 2026

June 18-19, 2026

Munich

Conference

IPBC Global 2026

June 15-17, 2026

San Diego

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

Articles

California Reaches Record $12.75 Million CCPA Settlement with General Motors Over Driver Data

June 4, 2026

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP