Defendant

Sony Corporation

1 case as defendant.

Company profile

Sony Group Corporation is a Japanese multinational conglomerate founded in 1946 and headquartered in Tokyo, Japan. The publicly-traded company (NYSE: SONY) is a major global enterprise with 113,000 employees as of March 2024 and reported revenue of ¥13.02 trillion for the fiscal year ending in March 2024. Sony's market capitalization was approximately $127 billion as of May 2026.

Sony operates a diverse portfolio of businesses organized into several key segments. The Game & Network Services segment is centered on the PlayStation brand of consoles and its online gaming network. The Pictures and Music segments comprise major film studios (Sony Pictures Entertainment) and one of the largest recorded music companies (Sony Music Group). The Entertainment, Technology & Services segment produces a wide range of consumer and professional electronics, including BRAVIA televisions, Alpha cameras, and audio equipment. The Imaging & Sensing Solutions division is a leading global supplier of CMOS image sensors for products like smartphones and cameras. Sony also has a significant Financial Services division, primarily in Japan.

As a major global operating company, Sony is frequently a target of patent litigation. The provided data shows the company in a defensive posture, with one tracked case as a defendant and none as a plaintiff. This is consistent with the profile of a large technology manufacturer defending itself against patent assertions from other entities. The single case listed is an action brought in the U.S. International Trade Commission, a common venue for patent disputes involving imported goods.

The tracked case is an investigation brought by ONE-E-WAY, INC. at the U.S. International Trade Commission. The dispute involved patents on wireless headphone technology that allows for private listening with minimal interference. In 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed an earlier ITC ruling that had invalidated One-E-Way's patent claims, and the case was sent back to the commission for further proceedings.