Prophet, from antitrust (monopoly) per se, you are right, but not from the "unfair trade practices". Xerox was forced by Justice to license all its competitors, because it created not only a monopolistic state (that held for a good 10/15 years) but "unfair trade practices". On the other hand, Polaroid won a $6 B judgement against Kodak, because it offered Kodak a license, and Kodak decided not to, but entered instant photography by violating Polaroid's patents (and breaching in the process a "non Disclosure-Non Use agreement, namely, Polaroid, opened its "kimono", and Kodak took advantage) It would help if a lawyer would step in and explain these differences, my knowledge in this field is marginal at best, only from my own licensing activities.
Zeev |
