decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Unproven Premise. | 50 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Unproven Premise.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 08:49 AM EST
Unproven Premise: Limiting access to technology promotes invention.

Please provide an example of this premise being true. Does not have to be a
general example.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Microsoft v. Motorola Trial in Seattle, Day 3 and Judge Crabb Explains Dismissal of Apple v. Motorola~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 05:35 PM EST
I think it is likely that the price of the licence would be unreasonable high if
it would be higher than the price of the whole generator. Especially if the
patented part is only small. Would make the price of the licensed generator
almost double the other generator.

This kind of imbalances would bring us to the smart phone costing a multiple of
the actual one, with many patent holders asking significant amounts for there
little tiny "contribution".

Not that there may not be any cases where this is possible. Suppose someone
finds a way to make cars at a tenth of the actual price. A license price, for a
limited time, between the new and the old production price seems reasonable. For
a limited time, otherwise you could be significantly blocking progress. But
seriously, what patented software invention did make that kind of
"contribution".

[ 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 )