Evan R. Cox

Former Partner

Evan Cox is a retired partner from Covington. He represented technology companies in complex patent and copyright licensing negotiations, due diligence and advisory matters, combining practical, result-oriented intellectual property advice and transactional capabilities with twenty-five years of antitrust counseling experience. He has broad experience with coalition structures, having helped clients navigate the unique dynamics and issues arising in joint development ventures, industry standard-setting organizations, patent pools and trade associations, serving as counsel to both individual members and the organizations. He advised on issues at the intersection between antitrust and intellectual property laws, successfully representing clients in investigations before the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and the European Union’s Directorate General for Competition. He has strong international experience bridging differing business cultures and legal systems, having worked extensively with European and Asian as well as U.S. clients, counterparties and local counsel out of Covington’s Washington, DC, London, and San Francisco offices. In his pro bono activities, Mr. Cox worked extensively with The Nature Conservancy and other environmental groups, counseled various non-profits on IP and open source issues, and served on the board of the Center for Youth Development Through Law, a pipeline to college program for at-risk youth in Oakland, Berkeley and Richmond California high schools, Mr. Cox is an active member of the Berkeley Law School community and past president of the Boalt Hall Alumni Association.


136 Bulletin

David W. Addis, Evan R. Cox, John Graubert, Theodore Voorhees Jr The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit holds that the avoidance of a RAND commitment leading to higher prices for licenses does not by itself amount to anticompetitive harm (Rambus)


On April 22nd, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals set aside the FTC’s 2006 decision that Rambus Inc. unlawfully monopolized four technology markets through deceptive conduct during the JEDEC standards development process for two widely-implemented computer memory standards. The Court held that (...)


Total visits

Number of readings per contribution

Number of contributions

Author's ranking
In number of contributions
In number of visits
In average number of visits
Send a message