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: who wrote (233)	6/3/1996 3:25:00 PM
From: PPKF	of 2383

I have read the entire licensing agreement posted at E-data's new site www.e-data.com. Here is what I've noted: 1. The contract is very short, the shortest of this kind I have read. 2. Clause 2B of the agreement states as long as the agreement is in effect, E-data agrees not to sue or assert any claims, causes of action, under the patents against a licensee. Clause 10 states termination of the agreement shall not relieve either party of its liabilities accruing up to the time of termination and shall not prejudice the right of either party to recover any sums then due. It went on to say that termination also shall not affect the right of E-data to assert legal actions for infringement under the claims of the patents against licensee for any period SUBSEQUENT to the termination of the agreement by either party. What about prior periods? This is supposed to be an amnesty licensing agreement. The agreement is unclear as to what time frame is being "forgiven" for prior infringement once a company signs up as licensee. 3. The licensing anniversary date is based on the sign up date. It appears to be a waste of money to sign up on any day earlier than the amnesty dead line, 8-31-96, if any party wants to sign up for whatever reason. 4. Clause 8 is for arbitration. Although it could save time, it may also limit litigation rights and rewards including punitive damage against willful offenders. I question would this be a wise term if E-data is confident about its own technology. 5. "E-dataSystemTM" defined in Clause 1A is clearly the contract "consideration" (described in Clause 2A) E-data agrees to provide to a licensee in exchange for license fee. Although 2B's "agree not to sue" could also be "consideration" prior to the patent is challenged, should the patent's validity is overturned by a court action, I still believe that there is a breach on the requirement of the grantor to provide rights of a valid patent. Paid license fees may likely be recoverable. There is too may little things about this short agreement I do not know where to begin without ending up writing for hours. What is your over all opinion about the "tightness", thoroughness and quality of this agreement especially in the area of defining "punishment" on defaults? Please advise. Thanks in advance. I suggest all who use this thread should visit the E-data's new site. Read this agreement and every thing it contains. The site also includes a delay stock quote link with two piece of important information -- transaction total and volume. One thing I urge E-data to do is to post the total number of licensees in good standing (those who have paid up) on a WEEKLY basis to this site. This is a very effective tool to let the world know the industry's perception on the company's legitimacy. I see no reason why E-data could refuse.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next