Note 17 - Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2025
Notes to Financial Statements
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]	17. Commitments and Contingencies Certain of the Company’s product and services agreements include an indemnification provision for claims from third parties relating to the Company’s intellectual property. Such indemnification provisions are accounted for in accordance with ASC No. 450 “Contingencies.” To date, there have been no claims made under such indemnification provisions. On May 8, 2025, a class action lawsuit captioned Ullom v. Digimarc Corp., et al., No: 3:25-cv-00779-JR (the “Ullom Action”) was filed against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. The complaint purports to assert claims against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s shares between May 2, 2024 and February 26, 2025 (the “class period”). The Ullom Action seeks to recover damages allegedly caused by purported misstatements and omissions regarding the renewal status of a commercial contract, claiming that these alleged misstatements and omissions artificially inflated the price paid for our common stock during the class period. Subsequently, four derivative lawsuits were filed nominally on the Company’s behalf, including three in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon on August 29, 2025 (as amended September 2, 2025) (Franchi v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01543-AN), October 7, 2025 (Chadwick v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01838-JR), October 14, 2025 (Jensen v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01891-SB), and one in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Multnomah on October 23, 2025 (Johnson v. McCormack et al., No. 25-cv-56998), which are based on the same alleged facts and circumstances as the above-referenced securities class action and are against the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and directors. The derivative actions collectively assert claims pursuant to Sections 10(b), 14(a), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as for breaches of fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets. Each of the four derivative lawsuits seeks to recover damages on the Company’s behalf and alleges that a legally required pre-suit demand on the Board of Directors would be futile and should be excused. On November 4, 2025, the Chadwick, Jensen and Franchi actions were consolidated and stayed pending resolution of the Company’s anticipated motion to dismiss in the Ullom Action. These cases are at an early stage. The Company believes it has defenses to the claims and is responding accordingly.

Note 17 - Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2025

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]

17. Commitments and Contingencies

Certain of the Company’s product and services agreements include an indemnification provision for claims from third parties relating to the Company’s intellectual property. Such indemnification provisions are accounted for in accordance with ASC No. 450 “Contingencies.” To date, there have been no claims made under such indemnification provisions.

On May 8, 2025, a class action lawsuit captioned Ullom v. Digimarc Corp., et al., No: 3:25-cv-00779-JR (the “Ullom Action”) was filed against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. The complaint purports to assert claims against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s shares between May 2, 2024 and February 26, 2025 (the “class period”). The Ullom Action seeks to recover damages allegedly caused by purported misstatements and omissions regarding the renewal status of a commercial contract, claiming that these alleged misstatements and omissions artificially inflated the price paid for our common stock during the class period.

Subsequently, four derivative lawsuits were filed nominally on the Company’s behalf, including three in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon on August 29, 2025 (as amended September 2, 2025) (Franchi v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01543-AN), October 7, 2025 (Chadwick v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01838-JR), October 14, 2025 (Jensen v. McCormack et al., No. 3:25-cv-01891-SB), and one in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Multnomah on October 23, 2025 (Johnson v. McCormack et al., No. 25-cv-56998), which are based on the same alleged facts and circumstances as the above-referenced securities class action and are against the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and directors. The derivative actions collectively assert claims pursuant to Sections 10(b), 14(a), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as for breaches of fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets. Each of the four derivative lawsuits seeks to recover damages on the Company’s behalf and alleges that a legally required pre-suit demand on the Board of Directors would be futile and should be excused.

On November 4, 2025, the Chadwick, Jensen and Franchi actions were consolidated and stayed pending resolution of the Company’s anticipated motion to dismiss in the Ullom Action.

These cases are at an early stage. The Company believes it has defenses to the claims and is responding accordingly.