Replies to post #214793 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[badgerkid]

Loop: "I would pay money to be the judge for just this pompous little bostord's testimony. I would find out how much he has been paid for his services and then hold him in contempt, place him in jail, fine him the amount of his fee to be paid before release and make him write a report on what he has learned about contracting with Nok to come to this country and insult the intelligence of the USA and the employees of the ITC."

Now that's the Loop we've come to know and appreciate on this board. Well said.

Is it just me, or is this case becoming more frivolous by the day?

Badger

[mainelefty]

Loop

I would pay pretty well for the opportunity to cross examine this genius for five minutes.

Incidentally, I would be glad to hear your appeal of Judge Jimlur's denial. There will be no stay and I lack jurisdiction.

Unfavorable comments from a Judge in civil cases have killed me in a couple of multi-week trials, after attorneys' closings. When the jury comes back in a complicated case before they would have a chance to even leaf through the exhibits and look at the pictures, you know you've been screwed.

[j70k]

And I suppose that all the cross licensing is done on a separate license for each essential patent. Just another case of Nok saying one thing and doing another. IMO

[hacitra]

wasn't ETSI created by an UN agency? if so, how can he claim that French law applies?

[mschere]

Judge Luckern has heard all about this French Law concept in 2 Prior cases ..
The experts for Samsung neglect to explain that they not only were paid as experts ..They also published a book on the subject..and in the end Samsung is paying royalty to Ericsson for their 2G & 3G Patents via SETTLEMENT..LOL..

Wireless Communication Devices and Equipment, 337-TA 577 (Samsung v. Ericsson) and 337-TA-583 (Ericsson v. Samsung):


FRANDly fire: are industry standards doing more harm than good?
Pat Treacy and Sophie Lawrance *

Legal context: The role of IP rights in standards; the meaning of the obligation imposed by many standards bodies on essential patent holders to licence on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (‘FRAND’) terms; the example of IPR policy of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute; recent US developments.

Key points: Industry standards are of key commercial and technical significance. Yet many standards are currently burdened by litigation between essential patent holders and licensees. Such standards bodies have been slow to give guidance on the meaning of the obligations imposed on essential patent holders. This article takes the example of the obligation to licence essential patents on FRAND terms, analysing the obligation in the context of European competition law. The article concludes with some suggestions for points for companies to include in their internal policies on licensing standards essential patents.

Practical significance: The meaning of the obligation to licence on FRAND terms is very important for licensors and licensees alike. This article puts the obligation in context and discusses the various approaches which may be taken in practice.


Key Words: The development and production of new high-tech products and services, particularly in the field of telecommunications, is increasingly governed by groups of IP owners—usually actual or potential competitors—who form themselves into standard-setting groups. • One of the major benefits of standard-setting is that, once a key piece of innovation is developed, its proprietary does not exclude its use by others but allows its use by any third party willing to accept a licence on FRAND (‘fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory’) terms. • The authors examine the state of legal wisdom and experience regarding FRAND terms, particularly in the light of the need to comply with competition law requirements and the ease with which FRAND licensing obligations may be abused.




* Pat Treacy is a partner, and Sophie Lawrance an associate, in the competition department of London law firm Bristows. The authors were part of the legal team representing Samsung Electronics Co Limited in litigation with Ericsson in 2006–2007 (now settled), one aspect of which related to issues concerning the 2G and 3G mobile telephone standards. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors alone. The authors would like to thank their colleagues (in particular Philip Westmacott) for their views on the issues discussed in this article.

[laranger]

Loop.

Or, you could just nuke 'em.

[my3sons87]

Loop, you are on target. Yes you are. How could I disagree with the following from your post. I wish I had the power to appoint you as Special Master for the French testimony, I mean BS. You posted the following:

"I would pay money to be the judge for just this pompous little bostord's testimony. I would find out how much he has been paid for his services and then hold him in contempt, place him in jail, fine him the amount of his fee to be paid before release and make him write a report on what he has learned about contracting with Nok to come to this country and insult the intelligence of the USA and the employees of the ITC."

MO
loop

You forgot to make him clean the bathroom, take US contract law 101 and stay after school. And then let him loose in the city to see if he BS his way safely back to Paris.

[olddog967]

loophole; Here is a comment from the French office of one law firm that does not appear to agree with Nokia's expert about what French law says in regard to an implied license.


The Paris office handles a broad range of trademark, copyright, design and model, know-how, and patent matters in France , where the strong bias of the legal framework in favor of the intellectual property rights holder provides interesting opportunities. Indeed, French law and case law is very protective of trademark holders and creators of protectable works, permitting broad protection of the holder or the creator's rights, including for example by the non-recognition of 'implied license' theory, the possibility of obtaining ex parte seizure orders, the existence of moral rights and the absence of a 'work-for-hire' regime in copyright, other than software copyright.

http://www.franchisecounselors.com/france/services/detail.aspx?service=147