InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 895
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/30/2012

Re: None

Wednesday, 08/15/2012 1:17:14 PM

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:17:14 PM

Post# of 23262
Heres a good example of a one sided opinion in PTSC's/EPL arguments before the ITC. This is one of the responses from Lawyers i presume from one of the complaintants.

While the ITC’s statutory mandate is distinct from that of the District Courts, that threat is equally if not more acute before the ITC, which is
expressly charged by Congress to award a patent owner an injunction only if it can be done without harming the American public. Where, as here, a patent is asserted against numerous companies that have already developed product and incurred enormous sunk costs, an ITC exclusion order, far from promoting innovation, can result in gross overcompensation to the patent owner through hold-up, to the detriment of consumers and
actual innovators. By their very nature, the products affected by TPL’s requested exclusion order—a


Really?? Americans will be hurt? Wait, we have 100's of officially licensed Vendors to use the MMP, therefore if you kick out the illegals, the Licensed Homegrown Vendors can pick up the slack and not lose money to those who do illegal things crossing our borders and cheaper so as to harm Americans.

Its a two way argument not a one sided argument. In the End we have valid patents, upheld by the courts.

And Illegals are swarming over the borders of this country bringing in illegal goods and selling them for cheap, hurting True American legally licensed practicing Companies.