% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Parkervision Inc. Message Board

  • jdonald6 jdonald6 May 24, 2000 12:46 AM Flag

    Prior art, current art, and litigation

    n bet
    SOMEBODY is going to have a problem with PRKR having "free
    and clear" rights to this technology if indeed it is
    the "holy grail". So as suggested in another post...I
    hope they are prepared as much for positive
    negotiations as they are for litigation.

    Lord knows
    Qcom might not of ever gotten the boost they got if
    the litigation they were in were to of kept dragging
    on. That MUST be a lession for little PRKR. Make
    friends EVEN at the cost of smaller royalties. Get rich
    from a "long haul lock in" of everybody NOT from some
    high threshold fee and tough deal making that forces
    some to go find alternatives.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I have seen first hand what happens when a small
      company asserts its patents against a larger company.
      Whoever has the most money has the advantage. I hope PRKR
      is aware of that. Having a large law firm
      represented on the board of directors does not help them. It
      is in the interest of the law firm to stir up

      Litigation is an economic choice based on risk/return
      factors. Each potentail licensee is looking at maybe $100
      M in royalties versus a $5 M gamble that has a one
      in three chance of overturning a good patent. If
      these patents have a weak foundation, it's not much of
      a gamble. That is why I am making waves.

      • 3 Replies to tybalt
      • Sterne is the attorney of record, he is on the
        board of directors, his PV compensation, obviously in
        the form of stock, is directly tied to the results of
        PV, and you assert that he wants to generate business
        for his law firm, fighting over PV patents. That's a
        whopper if I ever heard one. Get real. Sterne has done a
        magnificent job of researching the patents and giving a
        plethora of "cites" (another one of those patent attorney
        words) in fact more than I have ever seen in any patent
        I have reviewed. He has this stuff nailed, your
        minor comments notwithstanding. Jeff Parker can smell a
        "rat" a mile a way. Sterne et. al. are no rats.

      • Ty, Good points. We've all seen situations in
        which a smaller company's IP has been defended by a
        "rich uncle" acting in its own best interest. For
        example, IF (a big if!) there really is a PRKR/SBL/INTC
        alliance forming, Intel would undoubtedly be prepared to
        help defend PRKR's patents - it's usually less costly
        to license and defend someone else's IP than to
        develop it in-house, if the deal is right. If PRKRs
        patents are trashed, then no one gets to keep the pot of
        gold. OTOH, we've all seen cases in which perfectly
        good patents were crushed by a well-heeled opponent. I
        (as a long-time long) really hope that a powerful
        alliance is announced BEFORE the value of this technology
        is generally recognized. PRKR is about to win the
        lottery, and it's time to get a bodyguard.

      • I guess if PRKR gets a little more cash added to their balance sheet.. or a larger company to invest.. this will really help their strategy.

        My fingers are crossed.

5.74+0.02(+0.35%)Jul 27 4:00 PMEDT