XpresSpa Group Inc (XSPA)

[LOL]

Exactly!!! I and everyone else, because of the word "running" thought it meant future, it doesn't, and in the context the jury used today it is reffering to the past. The jury was applying running royalties, a form of computing royalties, to the past damages. Plus they gave a lump sum. Notice in todays PR, those were 2 seperate lines, one referred to Google and one referred to defendants.

Royalty in licence agreements is always in consideration of something that is provided by the licensor to the licensee in the agreement, such as the right to use a trademark, patent, know-how, designs, drawings or a combination of them.

Royalty payments take three basic forms:

'running' royalties
'lumpsum' royalty
running royalties together with lump-sum royalties

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty_rate_assessment

After finding that the asserted claims of the Patents were both valid and infringed by Google, the jury found that reasonable royalty damages should be based on a "running royalty", and that the running royalty rate should be 3.5%.

After finding that the asserted claims of the Patents were both valid and infringed by the Defendants, the jury found that the following sums of money, if paid now in cash, would reasonably compensate I/P Engine for the Defendants past infringement as follows: