[Ip-health] Recent compulsory licenses for Toyota and Microsoft

[George Willingmyre]

Thank you for these posts.

I see implications for licensors of essential  patents in standards.

George T. Willingmyre, P.E.
GTW Associates
1.301.421.4138
www.gtwassociates.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
To: "Ip-health" <ip-health@lists.essential.org>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:37 AM
Subject: [Ip-health] Recent compulsory licenses for Toyota and Microsoft


> Earlier I posted a note about the recent DirectTV compulsory
> licensing case. (http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/ip-health/2006-
> November/010193.html)  Here are two more recent US compulsory
> licenses on patents, one involving Toyota and another involving
> Microsoft.  All three cases involve implementation of the new
> standard for granting injunctions injunctive under the eBay case
> (eBay Inc. v. MercExchange,
> L.L.C., 126 S. Ct. 1837, 1839-1841 (U.S. 2006))
>
>    Jamie
>
> **********************
> The Toyota compulsory license of three Paice patents
>
> Paice LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp.
> Order:  http://www.fr.com/news/2006/Oct/Paice%20LLC%20v.%20Toyota%
> 20Motor%20Corp.pdf
> 16 August 2006
>
> This case involves three patents owned by Paice LLC, which were
> infringed by Toyota, in its hybrid vehicles, such as the Prius or
> Highlander.   US District Court Judge David Folsom (Easter District
> of Texas Marshall Division) denied a request for an injunction, in
> lieu of a compulsory license equal to $25 per vehicle.
>
> From the order:
>
> "Plaintiff's losses from Defendant's sales of infringing products can
> be remedied via monetary damages in accordance with the reasonable
> royalty set by the jury."
> ...
> "The infringed claims relate to the hybrid transmissions of the
> accused vehicles, but form only a small aspect of the overall
> vehicles. The jury's damages award also indicates that the infringed
> claims constitute a very small part of the value of the overall
> vehicles. The jury, based on the entire record, determined an
> appropriate reasonable royalty rate that can be easily calculated on
> future sales of the accused devices thereby removing uncertainty from
> future damages calculations."
>
> **********************
> Microsoft's compulsory license to two z4 patents
>
> Z4 Techs., Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.
> June 14, 2006
> Order:  http://www.fr.com/news/2006/Oct/z4_Denial-of-Permanent-
> Injunction.pdf
>
> From the Order:
>
> "z4 can be compensated for any harm it suffers in the way of future
> infringement at the hands of Microsoft by calculating a reasonable
> royalty for Microsoft's continued use of the product activation
> technology.
>
> "The Public Interest
> "Microsoft's Windows and Office software products are likely the most
> popular software products in the world. The vast majority of
> computers sold, whether to individuals, businesses, governments, or
> educational institutions, run on the Microsoft Windows operating
> system and employ the Microsoft Office suite of software.
>
> "Microsoft argues that the redesign of its Windows and Office
> products would undoubtedly effect certain sectors of the public.
> Microsoft suggests that smaller computer manufacturers (called system
> builders), retail sellers, and the consumers of both would be
> effected if z4's proposed injunction were granted.
>
> "Microsoft contends that the system builders would be harmed because
> of the time, testing, and expense required for these manufacturers to
> integrate a new release or re-release of Windows and Office products
> to be used with their computer systems. Although it is likely that
> changes to Windows or Office would not be significant enough to have
> as dramatic of an effect on the system builders as Microsoft
> proposes, such a re-release of the Microsoft products would likely
> create a burden for these manufacturers.
>
> "Furthermore, Microsoft contends that a redesign of its products
> could result in the products being taken off the market for a short
> period of time. Microsoft urges that such an absence from the market,
> even if for only a week, would have a detrimental effect on the
> retail sellers of its products as well as the retail consumers.
>
> Commentary:
> http://www.fr.com/news/articledetail.cfm?articleid=607
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love@cptech.org /
> tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
> "If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks."  Bill Walton"
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>
>