I have a special link set up so I can read all of his and loop's posts. This is why:
To all:
Hopefully, the following will shed some light on what Defendants are up to in scamming the ITC, FTC, DOJ and the POTUS in the area of patents and particularly IDCC. To understand, one must first understand what is involved in the cases as they currently stand. IDCC has multiple lawsuits pending around the USA and multiple ITC cases pending. Below is an abbreviate breakdown of the claims and defenses, followed by my conclusions. Good luck to all trying to figure out the answer to the horrible problems.
Oh, and least I forget, there are patent re-exams going on at the USPTO and then appeals to the CAFC on the USPTO decisions. All of these cases are exploding around the Country and have absolutely clogged up everything and IMO are aimed at destroying inventors of patents. (not IDCC)
LAWSUITS/DAMAGES/INJUNCTION ITC/INJUNCTION
1. PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS PLAINTIFF CLAIMS
a. infringement a. infringement
b. damages/FRAND b. injunction in USA
c. injunction in USA
2. DEFENDANT’S DEFENSES DEFENDANT’S DEFENSES
a. No infringement b. No infringement
b. unclean hands b. unclean hands
c. equitable/promissory estoppel c. equitable/promissory estoppel
d. patents not valid – obviousness d. patents not valid – obviousness
e. patents not enforceable due to e. patents not enforceable due to
breach of contract for FRAND breach of contract for FRAND
f. waiver f. waiver
g. unFRAND because IDCC is demanding a Worldwide license instead of just USA
h. unFRAND because IDCC is
demanding a license on entire
portfolio and not just patents
in suit
i. No injunction because it would
be anti-competitive and drive up
consumer prices
EVIDENCE FROM PRIOR ITC TRIAL WITH NOK/SAM
Defendant’s had a FRENCH lawyer testify that IDCC was not being FRANDly
Because: 1. There was an implied license at ETSI for patents held by members to all infringers; 2. It was a violation of FRAND to demand a license of entire portfolio including essential and non essential patents; 3. Since there was an implied license, Defendants could use all the patents for free while a lawsuit in court was determining a fair rate. BTW, we also learned that SSO’s can’t set FRAND rates and that they do not make any determination on validity or essentiality.
AUTOMATIC STAYS
Under the law, Defendants are entitled to a STAY of the Federal Court damage case pending a FINAL RESOLUTION of the ITC case including appeals, remands, retrials, more appeals, etc.
INJUNCTIONS:
THE FTC AND DOJ and maybe POTUS have jumped in the frays stating that the ITC and Courts should not grant injunctions in patent essential cases as injunctions are not in the public interest.
STAYS PENDING COURT DETERMINED FRAND
Now ZTE/Huawei/Nok want the ITC to STAY their determinations until the Federal District Courts can set a FRAND rate. But, what are they really saying? Are they going to Stipulate and Admit that the patents are valid and that they infringe and thereby limit the issue in Court to a FRAND rate? Are they waiving all the defenses they have plead in Court?ITC? Are they waiving their right to appeal any determination?
MY ANSWER: Absolutely Not. They only want to state that they are willing to pay a FRAND rate (only if it suits their purposes) What they want is a stay at the ITC and the right to appeal and go back to court on their defenses. They want the stay so that they can:
1. until they can bring more public pressure against injunctions, and
2. they can attack IDCC in Court on all the FRAND/ETSI defenses testified to
by the French lawyer; and
3. they will reserve the right to appeal any rate set by a jury and/or any verdict that IDCC was FRANDly in rate setting; and
4. they will reserve al other defenses on validity; unclean hands, equitable estoppel; breach of contract until another date and another trial and reserve
the right to appeal on those defenses.
WHAT CAN IDCC DO ABOUT IT
MY ANSWER: Keep fighting and point out that these foreign defendants (devils) are trying to avoid having to pay for infringement and any enforcement/delay by the ITC/Courts is going to add a decade at least to the disputes until the patents either expire, the plaintiffs’ go broke; the appeals become final or they take over Worldwide domination of patents such that there is no incentive for universities, thinktanks and individualsto invent and/or give up on the patent system as unworkable.
"The world is a dangerous place to live�not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." �Albert Einstein
| 