CBS Corp.

CBS Corp. (now Paramount Global)

CBS Corporation, often referred to as CBS, was a major American multinational mass media and entertainment conglomerate headquartered in New York City. The company's origins trace back to the establishment of the Columbia Broadcasting System as a radio network in 1927. Over its history, CBS Corp. underwent several significant transformations and ownership changes, including a period as Westinghouse Electric Corporation after acquiring CBS Inc. in 1995. The iteration relevant to the provided patent data was formed on December 31, 2005, after splitting from Viacom. It was a publicly traded company (NYSE: CBS.A and CBS) and, as of 2018, reported annual revenue of approximately $14.5 billion. In 2019, CBS Corporation merged with Viacom to form ViacomCBS, which was subsequently renamed Paramount Global in February 2022. Paramount Global, the successor, is controlled by National Amusements, Inc.

Prior to its merger into Paramount Global, CBS Corporation's operations spanned commercial broadcasting, publishing, and television production. Its diverse portfolio included the CBS Television Network, The CW (a joint venture), CBS Television Studios, Showtime Networks, CBS Sports Network, and the publishing house Simon & Schuster. The company engaged in producing, acquiring, and distributing programming across television, film, and digital platforms, as well as operating local broadcasting stations.

In terms of patent litigation, CBS Corp. exhibited the posture of an operating company defending against assertion. The company has a record of 1 tracked case, appearing solely as a defendant. This single instance, Personal Audio LLC v. CBS Corp. in 2013, took place in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically favored by patent assertion entities (PAEs).

The sole tracked case, Personal Audio LLC v. CBS Corp., highlights CBS Corp.'s involvement as a defendant in a patent dispute. This aligns with the typical profile of an operating company being targeted by a non-practicing entity asserting an acquired patent portfolio. The case's filing in the Eastern District of Texas further underscores this characteristic litigation pattern.