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.

Biotech / Medical : IGEN International -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sim1 who wrote (1024)	3/14/2006 11:24:32 PM
From: RCMac	Respond to of 1025

RCM, do you have an opinion on this [Solomon Technologies: SOLM]situation? Stuart, I have a position, not a large one - a "starter" - avg. cost abt 75c, in part because I trust Lawfighter's judgment. I don't know enough about either the technology or patent law to develop enough confidence for a big position, at least yet, but it certainly looks promising. (I've just moved to a new house we've built over the last 2 years - thanks largely to IGEN, RRI and SEPR - and will have more time to dig in further.) Note the difference between the IGEN case and this one. IGEN v. Roche was a breach of contract case, pretty straightforward and within reach of most lawyers. SOLM v. Toyota is a patent case, in an area of law largely outside my, and most lawyers'. experience. OTOH, in patent law there is a serious possibility that an infringer can be enjoined from further infringement - in this case, Toyota might be prevented, by government or court action, from importing and selling any more Prius cars. That's a real showstopper, worth a lot to Toyota to head off. That's a greater upside than IGEN's ever was. Toyota's boss said, in the 3/6 Fortune, that Toyota expects to sell a million Priuses annually by 2012 or so. In the absence of a clear picture of the merits, I thought this worth a flyer. The main conversation, still in its early stages, is on Raging Bull: ragingbull.lycos.com BTW, my favorite litigation play now is BRST, which has streaming video patents, got a $60M settlement from MSFT last year, and is now pursuing AAPL and others. Potentially this is a huge market, since it appears that most streaming video depends on processes quite like those patented by BRST. AAPL sued BRST for a declaration of non-infringement - likely a boneheaded move, calling attention to BRST's claims. Those claims are now under settlement discussions, staying the litigation.