Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gdichaz who wrote (3247)	6/28/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: slacker711	Respond to of 54805

I'm not positive but I believe that a company must lisence the entire Q patent portfolio (not just pick and choose what they need). So when the first patents covering various portions of CDMA expire, the licensee will still be on the hook if they are using any patents of CDMA which were still valid. I would think that as long as the Q continues to come up with innovative features for CDMA the lisencee's will still have to pay them. Slacker

To: gdichaz who wrote (3247)	6/28/1999 10:06:00 PM
From: red jinn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Thread: it's very common to license a portfolio of patents, but you can't "tie" the licensing of one patent to another; that's an antitrust violation. older folks will recall ibm getting nailed for "tying" the sale of punch cards to its machines - a definite no-no. what a licensor can do is say to the licensee: "here's my portfolio, which consists of know-how and patents with various lifespans remaining. i also expect to develop improvements, which may or may not be patented. i will license the know-how for x% and the patents for y% of net sales, i.e., for every product that's sold that uses k-h and patents, you owe me the higher of x or y - and it's almost always y. if you only use one, the you owe the applicable rate. however, if you (licenesee) make/sell a product a product that, absent the license, doesn't infringe any of my (licensor's) k-h or patents, then you don't owe me a thing. the trick, of course, is to have patents/k-h that must be used in the making/selling of a product. and as long as at least one claim - and a patent could have 50 claims - is used by the licensee, i.e., but for the license, the licensee would be infringing the intellectual property of the licensor, then the license owes a royalty for as long as that patent lasts. and this is usually done on a country-by-country basis b/c the life of patents is not the same in all countries, so you could owe royalties for sales in the u.s., but not in venezuela. generally the know-how royalties expire after, say, 10 years, altho that's not always the case. best, red jinn