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.

Technology Stocks : XYBR - Xybernaut -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wolff who wrote (3668)	3/24/2000 8:36:00 AM
From: Stan V.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6847

Thanks Wolf. Now that's some interesting info. Still the Epson deal looks more like a competitor to the PALM. An IBM PC AT is not such a heavy machine. My understanding is the XYBR core will use the new IBM technology and be a lot more powerful. In any event, someone has asked Moynahan about this and we shall see his reply. Again, thanks for taking the time to look this up. Stan

To: Wolff who wrote (3668)	3/25/2000 11:46:00 AM
From: Scott C. Lemon	Respond to of 6847

Hello Wolff, > DD: I just found the Patented "Core" already being made > by another company (not the XYBR part, but something > which appears to have the same form fit and function > prior to the patent). I looked at both these devices and > I can not see material differences. The Epson product has > been built long before the 2/22/00 patent award > Therefore, in my opinion, the potental impact and any > revenues from this patent would be impacted significant > due to prior work and uses. So I've reviewed the information, and have run through Epson's web site. (By the way, can you post a specific Epson URL that covers the Epson product?) A couple of issues that I can think of ... of course not being a Patent attorney ... 1. It appears that the component that you are referencing from Epson is exactly that ... a component. Not a product. They appear to sell a broad line of Card-PCs to OEMs ... so I'm not sure the difference between selling components, and products, when it comes to the patent. 2. The question of dates, IMHO, is no matter ... since Xybernaut doesn't even make their own internals! They are simply buying the Card-PCs from another component vendor and building them into their case, etc. So there are numerous vendors making these very small "Card-PCs" ... 3. By reading the "broad claim" that you quoted from the Patent, I guess that almost any motherboard could fit this description. So it's so broad, that there could be many infringers ... but this is what you want in a Patent! Broad claims, which can then be applied in many directions to create publicity and potential courtroom expenses. Remember that these are simply bargining chips ... not the real way to success ... ;-) The Patents are simply issues that competitors and partners will have to consider ... trying to base the total success of the company on them is crazy, and not necessary ... IMHO. Scott C. Lemon