|The AmeriKat has figured out |
one strategy: keeping warm in
the garden during the English summers
(courtesy of Joe Delaney)
|"Show me your SEP, and I will show|
you a willing licensee"
|Cracking the egg of patent infringement, before the|
FRAND chicken can be hatched
1. That the terms of its offer was an offer to licence its patents on FRAND terms and is therefore not obliged to offer to licence any of its SEPS on any other term.
2. In the alternative, it requested that the court declare that the terms of its offer complied with the Claimant's obligations to make a licence available to ZTE in respect of the patents in suit.
3. In the further alternative, Vringo requested that the court make a declaration as to what would constitute an offer to licence to the Defendants its patents on FRAND terms.
4. A declaration that in all the circumstances the Defendants had no entitlement to an individual licence to the patents in suit if they are found to be both valid and infringed by ZTE (UK) Limited.
|Judge Robart - the man|
of the moment in the
"...What is at stake between parties in portfolio patent litigation of this kind is usually the sum of money which will enable the grant of a worldwide licence under the entire portfolio. The preliminary issue seeks to get to the heart of that question, without the need to try the validity of 15 patents and the infringement of 3 of them, and a variety of ancillary defences."