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

Competition in Information Technologies: Standards-Essential Patents, NPE, and FRAND | 98 comments | Create New Account

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

Competition in Information Technologies: Standards-Essential Patents, NPE, and FRAND

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 11:02 PM EST

"Permitting the owner of a FRAND- encumbered patent to have an injunction
against someone willing to pay FRAND royalties is tantamount to making the
patent holder the dictator of the royalties, which once again is the same thing
as no FRAND commitment at all."

True. But also:

Not permitting the owner of a FRAND- encumbered patent to have an injunction
against someone unwilling to pay FRAND royalties is tantamount to making the
patent user to be the dictator of the royalties by using the patent and paying
nothing at all, while doing a stickup job of everybody else over a whole slew of
"non-standards-essential" patents on the obvious.

We have a perfect conundrum. The only solution is that everybody (including
Uncle Sam) realizes that we have a perfectly ridiculous situation in which a
major part of the problem is that too much has been patented which should never
have been allowed to be patented in the first place.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )