Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Conflict of interest | 379 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Conflict of interest

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 01:17 AM EDT

It is obvious that lawyers shouldn't draft laws.
Quite apart from the glaring conflict of interest(!) there is the added element
of laws being near-impossible for laypeople to understand.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why would anyone want to release a new product in the USA?

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 12:52 AM EDT

So, why would any company in their right mind actually release a new product when you can be sure that all the R&D costs will be dwarfed by the forthcoming legal bills you will have to foot in order to keep your product on sale?

Large affluent market that it fairly homogenous (you can seel the same widget all over the country). In most other reggions you have to customize for sub-markets, and translate displays and instructions. (This is often a legal requirement by local product safety authorities). Actually that point to another problem, in the US there are less regulations and formalities to fill before starting to sell your product, than in many other places.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why would anyone want to release a new product in the USA?

Authored by: kjs on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 04:06 AM EDT

the solution is pretty simple and I have helped several EU companies to
establish this.

Form an import LLC NOT owned by the company itself which is the official
importer of the product. Then form a sales LLC (naturally both either in
Delaware or Nevada) which does all the sales and has a contract with the import
LLC to be responsible for nothing (that's the short form).

Now, the only company to sue in the US are either the sales LLC or the import
LLC. If the sales LLC is sued as per contract it falls back to the import LLC
which simply goes belly up. A new import LLC with a different name is
established and now sells via the same sales LLC. No interruption in the sales
channel as a second or third import LLC can be formed early as they are darn
cheap to get (~$800/a).

There are a lot more fine details (like the import LLC having a subsidiary in
the home area of the manufacturer to buy the product "locally" = the
manufacturer doesn't sell to the US) to this but it's the basic concept.

>kjs

---
not f'd, you won't find me on farcebook

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why would anyone want to release a new product in the USA? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 04:57 AM EDT
- Why would anyone want to release a new product in the USA? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 11:12 AM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )