Poor AAPL complaining. [U]ntil the district court resolves that motion and enters a final judgment,
Apple cannot accurately or precisely frame its arguments to this Court. For Apple
to prepare and file an opening brief in this context would be unnecessary wasteful.
Doesn't mention anything about new patents. So I assume it uses technology already patented. I wonder what patents would cover making payments over an iPhone secure?
(Onion) - Apple, Inc posted a first-quarter loss on Wednesday as it set aside an extra $6 billion to cover litigation expenses, a figure that far exceeded the legal settlements the No. 2 U.S. company has announced recently.
13. [T]he portion of the realizable profit that should be credited to the invention as distinguished from non-patented elements, the manufacturing process, business risks, or significant features or improvements added by the infringer.
14. The opinion testimony of qualified experts.
15. The amount that a licensor (such as the patentee) and a licensee (such as the infringer) would have agreed upon (at the time the infringement began) if both had been reasonably and voluntarily trying to reach an agreement; that is, the amount which a prudent licensee -- who desired, as a business proposition, to obtain a license to manufacture and sell a particular article embodying the patented invention -- would have been willing to pay as a royalty and yet be able to make a reasonable profit and which amount would have been acceptable by a prudent patentee who was willing to grant a license.
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.
[A] comprehensive list of evidentiary facts relevant, in general, to the determination of the amount of a reasonable royalty for a patent license may be drawn from a conspectus of the leading cases. The following are some of the factors mutatis mutandis seemingly more pertinent to the issue herein:
1. The royalties received by the patentee for the licensing of the patent in suit, proving or tending to prove an established royalty.
§ 284. Damages
Upon finding for the claimant the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.
When the damages are not found by a jury, the court shall assess them. In either event the court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.
The court may receive expert testimony as an aid to the determination of damages or of what royalty would be reasonable under the circumstances."
Three times in EDTX with three different juries VHC's patents are found not invalid. And the CAFC if going say the patents are invalid. What's the point of a District Court if CAFC is going invalidate jury decisions. Might as well eliminate the DC and send everything to CAFC first thing.
A secure domain name service for a computer network is disclosed that includes a portal connected to a computer network, such as the Internet, and a domain name database connected to the computer network through the portal. The portal authenticates a query for a secure computer network address, and the domain name database stores secure computer network addresses for the computer network. Each secure computer network address is based on a non-standard top-level domain name, such as .scom, .sorg, .snet, .snet, .sedu, .smil and .sint.
high, I didn't want to jinx the outcome by saying there is 90% chance of HJD's ruling to stand as written. On a side note I've spent many hours reading the CAFC rulings. All the rulings that are overturned are done by citing previous rulings. HJD documented his opinion conclusively to the point that for the CAFC to send the case back they would be repairing older cases which I don't see them doing. JMHO
osprey, If the CAFC sends it back to HJD then the longs are out $12 a share. If however by some miracle the CAFC agrees with HJD 100% then VHC is $60+. This is turning into a multi-billion dollar poker game and we're waiting on the last card to be dealt.
Excellent read for those worried CAFC won't uphold the RR.
Gold up 1%. Silver up 2%. And good pour numbers, screams buy but pps does nothing. I guess this won't sink in until we are profitable.