I could be wrong about this, however I think in the US, you need to enforce the patent or risk losing it. Therefore, I'd assume that WDP will require anyone using the technology to get a license from them. Now that doesn't mean that some parties couldn't be charged more for the license and some less......
It would have been considered good business had Billy and Ad not missed ethics class at business school....and law class,....and strategy class.......and TQM class,......and PR class,........and gone on to alienate half the industry and countless consumers who will never buy from them again on principle..Originally posted by Pump'n'Splat
It's mine I tell ye, Miiiiine
What SP. did would be considered good business in the capitalistic world of dog-eat-dog-no-matter-who-we-screw. And sadly most business is based on that premise, especialy stateside.
Personally I find non-ethical business practices sickening, and I think the customer base for paintball mainly think the same way...I mean look at most teams, what's the proportion of ratracers to just chilled-out sportsfreaks?
this whole thing is just poetic justice dished out by an appropriate source
aahhhhhhh crap!Originally posted by fuzzy logic
taken from the thread in pbtalk:
JURY REACHES VERDICT IN NPF v. SMART PARTS PATENT CASE
A four-day jury trial on NPF's allegations of patent infringement against Smart Parts concluded Thursday, December 9, 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. The jury found claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 6,311,682 (the '682 patent) invalid for obviousness. Claims 21 and 39 of U.S. Patent No. 6,615,814 (the '814 patent) were not found to be invalid for obviousness. All three claims had previously been found to be infringed in a November 17, 2004 Memorandum and Order. Several post-trial issues remain pending and Smart Parts is preserving all of its legal rights.
Damages in the amount of $109,070 were awarded to NPF as a reasonable royalty for Smart Parts' infringement and an injunction prohibiting Smart Parts from future infringement of claims 21 and 39 of the '814 patent was entered following the jury verdict on damages.
_______________
This does NOT affect Smart Parts' ability to market, sell, and distribute its Shocker, Impulse, and Nerve paintball guns and will not detrimentally affect the quality or performance of its markers in any way.
_______________
Smart Parts has already taken all the necessary steps to comply with the terms of the injunction. Smart Parts' dealers and distributors therefore do not need take any action with respect to their continued sales of Smart Parts' products. The injunction does not apply to markers sold by Smart Parts before December 9, 2004.
Any dealer inquiries should be directed to Smart Parts at (724) 539-2660.
it may not have stopped them in their tracks but at least it stung them a bit.
Would be interesting to know whether this involves the right to continue to use the patented technology.
