They list a number of patents, and the 4,937,819 issued June 1990 is not relevant, as it is public domain now by law. Patent 5,243,627 issued in Sept 1993 is long in tooth and may have expired or is close to expiring. However, patents 5,719,858 and 5,852,631 issued in 1998 are still alive and well. I wonder if someone could toss out the troll lawsuit on the basis of fraudlent claims if public domain patents were cited?
Perhaps the subsequent citings are renewals of the original, expired patents.
In which case a good lawyer can argue that they are not legal.
They can argue until they're blue in the face. Until a judge (or jury) agrees it doesn't matter. Patent litigation is a sure way to the poor house, which is why it's rare.
-- Keith
Which article?
LOOK AT THE TITLE.
The EE Times, May 14th, PATENT TROLL ARTICLE.
It's ON THE COVER.
Duh!
Cover? How 20th Century.
It may be ON THE COVER, but it's not obvious on the home page:
Read the subject line...
poxy hell, did you even try to find the article? plug the date into the search facility and scroll a little.
-- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.