To: lml who wrote (144549 ) 8/26/2006 10:37:58 PM From: Jim Mullens Read Replies (2) | Respond to iml, re: QCOM GSM v NOK equitable estoppel discussion, and What we have here, .... & correct me where I am inaccurate, is no communication relating to Q's essential IPRs in the GSM/GPRS/EDGE standard, correct?” “When the estoppel arises out of the unfair activities of the party asserting its rights, then the law refers to it as an "equitable estoppel."it will not enforce its patent, and an infringer reasonably relies upon that communication to continue or expand its business. The communication itself can take almost any form, including conduct or silence, as long as it supports a reasonable inference that the patent will not be enforced. However, in order to show reliance, the infringer must have been lulled into a false sense of security with regard to continuing or expanding its operations. Consequently, silence alone is generally not enough to create an estoppel, unless the patent owner also has some other duty to disclose its patent position."This duty of disclosure often comes into play during a company's participation in a standards-setting process.”
