Olddog--Although French law differs from the US (we have the common law while the French have a civil code) there are certain principles that are found in most modern law. There can be an implied contract even if the terms are not set before work is performed. For example, under US common law, if you hired me as a lawyer to represent you in defending a case but I did not have you sign a representation letter stating what my hourly charges were, and I represented you in the case, you would be responsible to pay me. The amount wouldn't necessarily be my standard hourly rates but it would be an amount determined by a judge or jury to be reasonable compensation. Our common law states that under those circumstances, a reasonable person should know that if someone does work for them, even if they don't have a signed agreement with an agreed-upon price, that person should reasonably expect to pay a reasonable amount for the work performed. In reading the ETSI documents, I do not think anyone can reasonably conclude that a participant would reasonably expect to believe that if the parties cannot come to an agreement over commercial patent terms, there is an implied contract or license based on those documents that a manufacturer can nevertheless use that patent and doesn't have to pay anything until the patent holder brings a legal action. Evidently, the French law firm that you mentioned takes the view that French law is similar to our own with regard to claims of implied licenses. IMHO
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
