News Focus
News Focus
icon url

zombywolf

05/15/21 11:36 PM

#86520 RE: I-Glow #86518

I am quite sure the jury is going to concentrate on the patents and infringement at the trial. That is not going to be an easy cakewallk for Chanbond-the base patent got hammered at the CAFC. However, if they get past validity and infringement against Cox, the jury will see 3 guys that made a huge advancement in modem technology, not a NPE. And those 3 guys have been tirelessly working for 20 years to get recognized for their work.The jury wont give a damn about NPE's, if Chanbond can climb the mountain and validate their work at trial. And Whitman would surely strike you as a juror for cause, LOL. And Cox's side would take me out as well!
icon url

jesuslovzu

05/16/21 3:11 PM

#86523 RE: I-Glow #86518

This is not some random patent troll type issue. We have 3 inventors who were obviously very much a part of the process...They tried to sell their tech and it was stolen.

You can say patent troll all you want, but that's just an unofficial term. You know what is official, though? Laws. WHen someone invents something in this country and then patents it... You can't just steal it and justify it by calling them a 'troll'.

THis isn't some obscure hard to understand issue, and it wasn't inadvertant theft, it was blatant.

I think the jury will see plaintiffs as real people rather than trolls, but I have no concerns about winning either way.

Concerns are Billy settling for too little, or keeping everything for himself.

The idea that companies that steal contribute to society, whereas the people they steal from do not.... I differ with you big time there. We are a civilation built on laws... take that away and it all falls apart.

GLTA