On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 12:53:03PM -0500, David Starner wrote: > Thompson claims they require licensing. The questions I've heard are not > over whether the patents are valid, but whether they cover decoding, an > issue which would be up to a civil court, who would ask for predominance of > evidence.
In a court case that would call into question one of Thompson's biggest revenue streams, you could expect the big guns. A large number of companies, with a large number of corporate/patent lawyers, already pay Thompson royalties, which means that they at least thought the situtation was insufficiently clear that legal fees weren't merited. I agree that it may not be fair, but without tens of thousands of dollars (us), you wouldn't even be able to get through the pre-trial motions. :/ The actual suit will be in the six to seven figure range. I know a lot of companies that get by on flimsy patents because their licensing terms come in just lower than even a successful law suit would cost a would-be licensee. Nobody that has been in a patent lawsuit will ever question the real value of Xiph and their excellent work. :) (not that anyone else would either) -drew -- M. Drew Streib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Independent Rambler, Software/Standards/Freedom/Law -- http://dtype.org/
pgpSVlzYsMfBa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
