jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
 ·ViaTalk
| reply to qworster
Re: In other patent news...
Good find -- this opens a big can of worms, for a VOIP company. If they buy soft switches from a company that is later found to be infringing on someone else's patent, is the VOIP company going to be held liable, when all they did was buy some hardware?
That's where the ongoing cash flow is coming from (to pay those royalties) so you can bet that's what the lawyers are going to want to pursue. |
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
·Brand X Internet
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
| Today, the SCOTUS agreed to hear a case involving "double dipping" of patents. In other words, is it fair for a patent holder to sue everyone down the line if their patent gets infringed.
Quoting Slashdot:
"This case, officially between LG and Quanta, really concerns the question of how many times patent holders can get a cut of any component found violating a patent. Currently, patent holders will often sue up and down the food chain. So, if you happen to have a patent on a component within a motor that is used in automobile wipers, you could sue the motor maker, the wiper maker and the auto manufacturer -- and get all three to pay, even though the same product is used throughout the supply chain. This case will look at whether or not it makes sense to allow for that type of double, triple or quadruple dipping."
|
