Until the laws allow IDCC to obtain an injunction against an infringing party during the litigation process, enforcing our patents will remain difficult. The longer companies are allowed to infringe, the larger the past royalty obligations become. I find it amazing that the courts continue to block small inventors from leveling the playing field. Infringing parties make billions of dollars using our technology easily offsetting their litigation expense while IDCC receives nothing during the years of litigation. The company and the shareholders must pay the legal expense which effects earnings and multiples used for evaluation purposes. The inventor is taxed with costs of developing their inventions, proving same sufficient enough to be accepted as the best in the standards and then spend megabucks trying to enforce the covenant of the infringing party to license the technology contained in the standards. All the infringing party has to do is wait for the standards, buy the components, assemble and place the final product into commerce. There is no reason to disallow an inventor from seeking a temporary injunction from the use of the invention if they can prove at least 50% of the manufacturers have performed their obligations contained in the covenant to license, irreparable harm will be suffered during pendency of the litigation and additionally in the evaluation process of the company even if completely successful in a final judgment.
We beat Asus, won Taiwan, expanded to Germany, continue to receive patents every month and have about 3/4's of a billion sitting in the bank. Where are we going wrong? Somebody, anybody, please explain this to an old geezer that clearly does not understand investing.
MO
loop
| 
