This week the Supreme Court issued a long-awaited ruling in LG Electronics' lawsuit against Quanta Computer. The case dealt with how far patent rights extend when one party has licensed its technology to another.

In plain terms, LG was seeking damages from Quanta for infringing on their computer technology patents. Here's the kicker, though: LG had previously authorized the sale of microprocessor components to Quanta via intermediary Intel. So while LG had okayed the sale of its parts to Quanta (and ostensibly gotten paid for it), they then decided to sue them for more money because Quanta was using those parts. Not seeing LG's logic? The Supreme Court didn't either, ruling in Quanta's favor.

In deciding the case, the court noted that Quanta had only used the microprocessors in conjunction with LG's computer technology, which was the intended use of the chip when LG sold them to Quanta in the first place. During oral arguments before the court, Justice Steven Breyer posed the following question to LG's attorney: Should a patent owner be able to sell a bicycle pedal to a person only to later claim that the bicycle pedal cannot be used for its intended purpose (pedaling a bicycle)?

While Quanta can now breathe a sigh of relief, we've got our own question for LG: Is suing your customers really a good business strategy?