EDTA (was GIFT) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : EDTA (was GIFT)

EDTA 0.000200

+300.1%

Mar 7 3:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: PPKF who wrote (230)	5/20/1996 3:54:00 PM
From:	of 2383

Where did we find out the attorney was being paid in stock? I remember seeing a press release that said GIFT had completed a private placement to show their abiltiy to continue to litigate this matter. Presumably, this means somebody is getting cash, or cash and stock. Also, I think companies could be required to fulfill their license agreement, even if one court declares the patent invalid. A license agreement is an enforceable contract, so the terms of the agreement would control. To be refundable the terms would have to allow for the previously paid $$ to be refunded, and allow for termination upon such court action. This is fair because these companies could fight instead of paying, and since they chose to treat the patent as valid, they should be bound to the terms of their agreement. (one year - big deal)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next