[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)

(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

From: Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>
To: Xavi Drudis Ferran <xdrudis@tinet.org>
Cc: patents@aful.org
Subject: Re: [Patents] (USA) judge says MS must pay Eolas despite reexamination
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:42:00 +0100 (CET)

> I guess MS will get the money back when the patent is invalidated.

I see little reason to assume it will be invalidated.

> Many others would not be able to pay.

These others would not have to pay as much.

The sums depend on estimated earnings that involve infringement of the
patent.

(USA) judge says MS must pay Eolas despite reexamination, Xavi Drudis Ferran
- Re: [Patents] (USA) judge says MS must pay Eolas despite reexamination, Hartmut Pilch
  - Re: [Patents] (USA) judge says MS must pay Eolas despite reexamination, Xavi Drudis Ferran

(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)