Mosaic ImmunoEngineering Inc (CPMV)

[Neverending]

This is new information and explains PTSCs current situation and the much changed environment for patent holders. This is why I am on the sidelines with regard to PTSC but watching for positive developments. I think there will be lots of time to buy in when/if that happens.
An excerpt from the article:

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/06/15/patent-reform-fuels-fear-paralyzes-innovaiton-market/id=58743/

Judge Michel explained:
It used to be, in my opinion, that we had something you could call an honor system in this country. So, for example, in the 1990s IBM licensed to thousands of entities, tens of thousands of patents for important technologies and never had to file a lawsuit. Their program was so huge that it netted profits of several billion dollars a year and required no litigation at all. Why? Because the honor system was in effect then.
David Kappos and I became affiliated with something called the Intellectual Property Exchange International, which was an attempt to create something like the New York Stock Exchange for patent rights. It would be totally transparent, non-discriminatory, open market-based pricing and so forth. It went out of business on April 30th because despite having numerous portfolios that looked to me to be of very high value and that had been independently vetted for validity and economic impact, in the end every one of the apparent infringers declined to buy a license. In every one of the cases the business people in the infringing company wanted to buy a license and [it] would go right up the line, yes, we should take a license, it’s a good business deal and it was very good because they could buy not only a license very cheaply going forward but six years of backward immunity and most of them had been practicing these technologies for years and years. So the dollar amount of infringement damages could have been quite huge. So what happened in the end? What happened in the end was either at the CEO level or when they consulted outside counsel in every single case every perspective licensee was told by their outside lawyers do not negotiate, do not license, do not respond, throw away the letter, don’t answer the phone call, don’t do anything unless and until they sue you. If they sue you call us and we’ll defend you and … maybe we can invalidate some or all of the patents in an IPR and we can outlast almost any plaintiff. So in the end nobody took a license so the enterprise of creating a stock market for patent rights collapsed, went away.
I mention this story simply because it’s further illustration of what a complete sea change we’ve seen in this country already so to me that raises big questions about the risks of further negative changes if we have reform that’s not really well thought out.

Efficient infringement and the consequences

Judge Michel is certainly correct. One thing that all the changes in patent law over the last decade has accomplished is to make it a far better business decision to infringe. There has always been concern in the patent holder community about something called the efficient infringement theory. Under this theory it makes more sense to infringe rather than to negotiate and seek an amicable resolution. In the past this was a problem largely isolated to small businesses and independent inventors who simply didn’t have the resources to fight when their rights were being infringed by a large entity that was not interested in participating in a responsible way in the honor system that Judge Michel describes. Today, however, efficient infringement is alive and well, and is a problem for all patent owners regardless of size.