PTSC Message list | Reply to msg. | Post new msg. « Older | Newer »
By: dued_works
05 Sep 2004, 12:43 PM EDT
Msg. 66991 of 66991
(This msg. is a reply to 66990 by BaNosser.)
Jump to msg. #
A " normal" part of the legal process for patent infringement claims would be the determination (before the litigation) of who, exactly, owns what, exactly... Hence, I believe that need led PTSC's management and lawyers to the realization that they currently only have generalities, meaning there was no confirmed up-to-date legal document signed by all parties that would include the " needed repair" of any impairment of the original patent ownership transfer to PTSC. Since they probably could not quickly and readily reach a signed agreement amicably (each was not willing to conceed anything about the value they deserved IMHO, so based on their own internal negotiations and discussions they had to agree to another way to solve this.) They decided to force a legal decision that would precisely define their ownership boundaries. (They were probably only a small percentage apart in their opinions, but each percent could mean a lot of dollars.) Hence, the hearing which led to the judge telling them NO, they should first exhaust their own processes including arbitration if necessary before calling on the courts to set the exact percentages of ownership and distribution rights.
So, you see, the patent owning parties can still work together cooperatively and yet not have a precise framework. Each must be mature enough to recognize that working together is for the benefit of the whole, even while the differences are still being resolved.
(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Strong Buy)
Advertisements
|
Thread abonnieren
