InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 168
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/21/2004

Re: None

Wednesday, 01/05/2005 1:13:55 PM

Wednesday, January 05, 2005 1:13:55 PM

Post# of 23273
I don't think Intel will allow PTSC to be named sole owner. They will have to pay substantially more, even if they choose to settle with Intel in the next round. PTSC's value goes sky high after receiving the rights to the patent and Intel IMO can not let that happen.

I think Intel has 1st dibs on PTSC. If AMD wanted to get into this fight, they would have to wait and see if PTSC would be sole owner because AMD doesn't have anyone on the inside monitoring the case. AMD couldn't try and acquire PTSC, or join into an agreement, b.c they can't be certain PTSC is sole owner.

I think Intel and TPL are joined at the hip. If Intel, Fujitsu and friends are confident that TPL has no defense, Intel will settle or acquire. It will be substantially cheaper than to allow PTSC to become sole owner. If PTSC becomes sole owner they r entitled to 6 years of Intel revenue (and probably other infringers) involving the fish clock. That could easily be tens of billions if no prior license existed.

I do not believe the '336 patent has been licensed to anyone prior to the "nuissance" licensing in June, 04. Which means whoever is sole owner gets it all b.c according to the court documents... there is no competition or rival for the Fish Clock...




Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent CPMV News