|
|
| Author |
Topic |
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
|
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
From Patriot Scientific website:
12.18.2006
Patriot Scientific Highlights Successful Calendar Year as Schneider Electric Joins Stellar Roster of Moore Microprocessor Patent™ Portfolio Licensees
|
 |
|
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Recent News from Patriot Scientific.
2007-2-23
Letter from David Pohl, Chairman and CEO of Patriot Corporation
2007-2-22
Patriot Scientific Corporation Announces Cash Dividend and Future Semi-Annual Dividend Policy
2007-2-20
Patriot Scientific Momentum Continues as Funai Purchases Moore Microprocessor Patent™ Portfolio License
2007-2-08
Patriot Scientific Announces Purchase By NEC of First 2007 Moore Microprocessor Patent™ Portfolio License
For details on all the above, visit: http://www.ptsc.com/news/index.asp
|
|
|
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Since my last post on this thread in late October several more companies have signed licensing agreements for the right to use the MMP™ Portfolio (as noted by rjayem), including: Agilent, Lexmark, Schneider Elec, Funai, SanDisk and most notably NEC.
In the process of managing and prosecuting the patent portfolio jointly owned with Patriot Scientific http://www.ptsc.com/, The TPL Group http://www.tplgroup.net/ filed a broad-based intellectual property claim against four major Japanese electronics system manufacturers in the US District Court, Eastern District of Texas http://www.txed.uscourts.gov/. The broad-based claim cited Fujitsu (who has since settled for $30M) , Matsu****a, NEC (settled just weeks ago, see PR dated Feb 8, 2007) http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070208/clth125.html?.v=9 and Toshiba for direct infringement, contributory infringement, and inducing the infringement of at least three of the ten patents in the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ (MMP) Portfolio, specifically:
U.S. 5,784,584: Multiple Instruction Fetch
U.S. 5,809,336: Clocking CPU and I/O Separately
U.S. 6,598,148: Use of Multiple Cores and Embedded Memory
IMO: In the spirit of being balanced and totally objective, playing devils advocate if you will, I'll address the risk. Is there a risk factor? Absolutely, in the event there is a profound negative outcome in the Court process along the way, the share price would most certainly drop further than it already has. How much of drop is unknown, it would be totally relative to the degree of effect on future revenues in any such decision. Conversely, a positive decision by the Court would have the opposite effect.
I believe the risk factor had been factored in to the PPS when it fell below $1 per share. Every penny below has been compounded overreaction for this risk.
Bear in mind that this is a technology stock with a P/E multiple of 10!
A profitable company with no long term debt that is actively buying back shares and actually has paid three cash dividends with plans to pay future dividends every six months.
Scope of the MMP™ Portfolio
The cited infringement pertains to an extremely wide variety of end-user products including but not limited to:
Cell phones
Smart cards
Remote controls
Appliances
Portable computers and devices
Motor controls
Industrial automation systems
Desk top personal computers
Servers
Workstations
Printers
Routers
Home theater systems
Digital TVs
Video game players
DVD Recorders/Players
Mobile handsets
Portable media players
Automotive and aircraft/aerospace electronics
And most other modern microprocessor-based products
The MMP™ Portfolio, which encompasses US, European and Japanese patents, is protected through the year 2015. Global sales of end products deploying chips using technologies protected by these jointly held patents are estimated to be greater than $200 billion annually.
The ultimate question is:
What is the MMP™ Portfolio potentially worth?
Rough and dirty, without considering inflation; the life of the patents (20 years) multiplied by $200 billion annually equals $4 Trillion of end products deploying chips using technologies protected by the MMP Portfolio of patents. Just to give you an idea of just how great this number is ($4T), if licensing revenues average out throughout the life of the portfolio at just one-tenth of one percent of this figure, it will amount to $4B in MMP™ licensing royalties for the joint partnership. This of course is just an estimation. There are several variables or hurdles that must be overcome. However, it is certainly well within the realm of possibility. All I know is more and more companies are signing licensing contracts.
Of these contracts calculations are not an easy task, each individual company has it's own set of circumstances in regard to which products infringe, how much they have sold and how much will sell in the future. An arduous undertaking indeed. This is exactly why it takes the time that it does in order to arrive at a settlement for each respective company. The larger the company, the more likely it is that there is a larger product mix and obviously much higher sales of these products that must be evaluated. Since early last year, there has been no shortage of companies willing to purchase an MMP™ Portfolio License.
Not including Intel and AMD; Patriot Scientific received forty-eight million dollars after allocation for expenses, from the total license fees from the jointly owned MMP™ Portfolio in calendar year 2006.
2007 is off to a good start with the signing of three more contracts of which one in particular (NEC) was named as a defendant in the intellectual property claim in the US District Court, Eastern District of Texas. Negotiations with NEC took years. I suspect the dollar figures to be relatively substantial.
I think we can all agree that the potential is enormous. However, the value of the stock has been depressed because the true valuation is contingent on decisions forthcoming from the Court or all defendants settling before the end of the Court proceedings. The later seems much more likely with half of the defendants breaking ranks, now legally licensed to use the MMP™ Portfolio.
Some of the reasons I believe forward momentum is in the future for PTSC:
Patriot Scientific is currently seeking and evaluating opportunities to add to and diversify revenue by acquiring other companies and technologies, entering into joint ventures, developing and marketing new proprietary products or technologies, or a combination of any of those alternatives.
Signed licensing agreements with three global corporations (Funai, NEC, SanDisk) in just the last six weeks.
Millions of dollars in cash on hand.
Millions of dollars recently signed with dollar figures yet to be disclosed.
Unprecedented among Micro cap stocks, 2 cash dividends in 2006
Another cash dividend in 2007
Announced policy of a Semi-Annual cash dividend
Actively implementing the open market share buy-back program
Conversion and retirement of all outstanding debentures
No long term debt
Insider buying/acquiring of shares
Marksman Hearing set for May 3, 2007
Next quarterly report should reveal some telling numbers of receant licensing revenue
More than 380 of the first 400 companies formally notified remain unsigned.
I would like to further add, all of the MMP™ revenue received thus far has been at a discounted rate for voluntary first round IP cliental. Patriot Scientific is quickly approaching $100 Million in total dollars received for their share alone from these early licensees. All coming from approximately 4% of the first 400 companies notified.
With every passing day, week and month the conclusion of the case before the Court draws closer. I ask myself; why would companies continue to license the MMP™ Portfolio of Patents for millions upon millions of dollars as this legally binding omnipresent declaration of the Court methodicaly presses on towards an ultimate judicious resolution? I believe I know the answer...thats why Im long on PTSC.
Again, all IMHO. GLTAL |
|
|
|
kramisman
Junior Poster
28 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
I have been trying to remain patient as this thing unfolds. However, I am beginning to get a bit worried. I had a friend of mine ask a colleague in a very large law firm about patriot. While he didn't do much digging, he told my friend that "anyone who has a patent "portfolio" in his opinion, is a troll".
I have read much about ptsc and their technology. It seems like a cant lose situation. If so, why is the pps so low? What are the chances that the markman hearings conclude that Patriot is just another troll?
|
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
"my friends colleague's opinion"
You just described all companies with more than one patent. That is an awful lot of companies. Many of which, are pretty good company.
Here is my opinion, for what it's worth.
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to a patentee (the inventor or assignee) for a fixed period of time in exchange for the regulated, public disclosure of certain details of a device, method, process or composition of matter (substance) (known as an invention) which is new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable. After the designated fixed period of time all features of the patent become free to all. This is a fair way to reward the hard work and innovation of those so inclined to conceive and invent. The inventor benefits financially in the short term through their exclusive rights while industry and society at large benefit through accelerated technological evolution.
Wether the inventor is a global corporation, small business, university or the average Joe working out of his garage; everyone has the inalienable right to be compensated for their hard work and contribution to society.
Patent reform? Why should only those companies who have the money to manufacture and pay lobbyists, be exclusively entitled to the privilege of royalties?
The truth is... it's not a privilege, it's a right. The right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented invention for the term of the patent, usually 20 years from the filing date. A patent is, in effect, a limited property right that the government offers to inventors in exchange for their agreement to share the details of their inventions with the public. Like any other property right, it may be sold, licensed, mortgaged, assigned or transferred, given away, or simply abandoned. A right each and everyone of us have; if we have the desire to dream, fortitude to persevere and the tenacity to develop our God given ability. The denial of others rights must never be for sale.
The USPTO system works for and protects everyone. It is a fair system in rewarding the innovator (for a relatively short period of time) and then contributing this knowledge to the collective knowledge and advancement of humankind for the remainder of all time. And through this process, this knowledge is brought to the attention of all others to build upon, spurring yet more innovation tenfold. Intellectual property (patent) compensation is not only a legitimate, legal commercial activity, it is the very backbone of the industrial revolution of the past two centuries from a platform of free markets. It is the very root of what defines capitalism within a democracy the undisputed gold standard admired and emulated around the globe. A patent is property, with the right to dispose of in any way the owner sees fit. This includes an inventor's right to sell the patent, at whatever price he/she deems sufficient, to any other person or entity willing to pay. This investor (or troll as some have labeled them) in turn has the right to exploit this property to it's full potential. Devaluing this property at any stage would cause the entire system to collapse rendering patents worthless and stifling collective innovation.
Funny how those who sling labels like "patent troll" think it's OK when big business buys, sells and exploits their patents yet when the small guy attempts to use patents to his or her advantage, they're morally reprehensible. Well, guess what, if the property is valid, enforceable and others do in fact use or infringe, then market value is what is due. Regardless of what size company
Microsoft gets about 75 percent of its 40 billion dollars in revenue from licensing fees. IBM earns more than a billion USD every year in royalties http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/
"HP Announces Intellectual Property Licensing Group to Leverage Growing Patent Portfolio" http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2004/040112c
"TI has built an impressive patent portfolio from which it derives considerable strategic advantage including licensing revenues in excess of $US 800 M per year" http://www.semiconductor.com/products_and_services/client_success_stories/ti.pdf
html
All text within this post is in the vein of my opinion. Owning PTSC stock has risk and uncertainties as well as some very favorable possibilities. Please access your own tolerance for this risk including consultation from an investment profesional.GLTAL
Reference: Wikipedia Encyclopedia
Interview with Mac Leckrone, Alliacense president April 2007 Edition http://spectrum.ieee.org/apr07/4989
|
|
|
|
plyd
Nano Newbie
2 Posts
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Patriot Scientific Confirms Continuing Momentum as Sharp Purchases Moore Microprocessor Patent(TM) Portfolio License
Wednesday April 11, 9:05 am ET
CARLSBAD, Calif., April 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTC Bulletin Board: PTSC - News) confirmed today that Sharp Corporation has purchased a Moore Microprocessor Patent(TM) (MMP) Portfolio license. Patriot Scientific and The TPL Group are co-owners of the MMP Portfolio, which Alliacense, a TPL Group enterprise, exclusively manages.
Sharp is the 16th company to join the distinguished roster of global manufacturers that have captured early-mover MMP licensing berths in specific industry segments since January 2006. Alliacense again confirmed that subsequent licensees in segments where early tiers have been secured are subject to progressively higher royalty rates on relevant products.
The intellectual property assets protected by the MMP Portfolio encompass fundamental design techniques that enable higher performance and lower cost digital electronic systems ranging from cell phones and portable music players to communications infrastructure and medical equipment as well as automobiles, which today utilize dozens of microprocessors.
"As a co-owner of the MMP Portfolio we are pleased to welcome Sharp to the growing family of companies participating in the MMP Portfolio Licensing Program," said David Pohl, chairman and CEO of Patriot Scientific Corporation. He noted that HP, Casio, Fujitsu, Sony, Nikon, Seiko Epson, Pentax, Olympus, Kenwood, Agilent, Lexmark, Schneider Electric, NEC Corporation, Funai Electric and SanDisk have purchased MMP Portfolio licenses in the past 14 months. Intel and AMD are also licensees.
Pohl noted that the strong momentum of the licensing program validates the decision by Patriot's board of directors in June 2005 to shift the company's primary business model from manufacturing and marketing products to a model currently focused primarily but not exclusively on licensing their joint venture MMP patent portfolio. He emphasized that Patriot Scientific invested millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of man-hours over 12 years or more developing and bringing to market products based upon the company's intellectual property, including IP contained in the MMP Portfolio.
"We will continue to seek and evaluate opportunities to diversify our revenue stream by developing and marketing new technologies, entering into joint ventures or by acquiring other companies and technologies," Pohl stated, "always pointed toward the goal of increasing the financial position and strength of the company and providing value to our shareholders."
About Sharp Corporation
Since its founding in 1912, Sharp Corporation has fashioned a global name as a comprehensive electronics manufacturer. Focused on consumer and information products, Sharp recently demonstrated at the Consumer Electronics Show the world's largest LCD TV (108-inch) as well as wireless image-transfer from cameras and cell phones to TVs, and the industry's first modems for transferring two high-definition feeds through a single power line in the home. For more information, visit www.sharp-world.com.
About Patriot Scientific
Patriot Scientific is a leading intellectual property licensing company that develops, markets and enables innovative technologies to address the demands in fast-growing markets such as wireless devices, smart cards, home appliances and gateways, set-top boxes, entertainment technology, automotive telematics, biomedical devices and industrial controllers. Headquartered in Carlsbad, Calif., information about the company can be found at http://www.ptsc.com .
Copies of Patriot Scientific press releases, current price quotes, stock charts and other valuable information for investors may also be found at http://www.hawkassociates.com, http://www.americanmicrocaps.com, and at www.agoracom.com/IR/Patriot, in addition to the company's web site.
About the Patent Portfolio
The patent portfolio, marketed as the Moore Microprocessor Patent(TM) Portfolio, is jointly owned by the publicly held Patriot Scientific Corporation and the privately held TPL Group. The portfolio encompasses seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts fundamental to the design of modern microprocessors, microcontrollers, Digital Signal Processors (DSPs), embedded processors and System-on-Chip (SoC) implementations.
About Alliacense
Alliacense is a TPL Group Enterprise executing best-in-class design and implementation of Intellectual Property (IP) licensing programs. As a cadre of IP licensing strategists, technology experts, and experienced business development /management executives, Alliacense focuses on expanding the awareness and value of TPL's IP portfolios. Founded in 1988, The TPL Group has emerged as a global coalition of high technology enterprises involved in the development, management and commercialization of IP assets as well as the design, manufacture and sales of proprietary products based on these same IP assets. For more information, visit www.alliacense.com.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, patent litigation, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Moore Microprocessor Patent (MMP) and Alliacense are trademarks of Technology Properties Limited (TPL). PTSC and Ignite are trademarks of Patriot Scientific Corporation. All other trademarks belong to their respective owners.
CONTACTS:
Patriot Investor Relations:
Hawk Associates, Frank Hawkins or Ken AuYeung (305) 451-1888
info@hawkassociates.com
AGORACOM Investor Relations, PTSC@Agoracom.com
www.agoracom.com/IR/Patriot
Patriot Media Relations: The Hoffman Agency, John Radewagen,
(408) 975-3005 jradewagen@hoffman.com
Alliacense Media Relations: Tom Rigoli, Mindpik, (650) 969-5986
rigoli@mindpik.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Patriot Scientific Corporation http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070411/clw042.html?.v=88 |
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
|
|
d2006s
Nano Newbie
4 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Incite,
what are your thoughts regarding the defense's claims from the Markman hearing?
would appreciate your weighing in.
thanks
d2006s |
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
In my view, the claims made by the defense are primarily based on non infringement of the "584" patent which has been and currently is being infringed, however not nearly to the extent of the U.S. 5,809,336 patent (Clocking CPU and I/O Separately)
and the U.S. 6,598,148 patent (Use of Multiple Cores and Embedded Memory). Their angle is an attempt to bundle all the MMP Portfolio patents in to one lump there by circumventing their enormous liability to the fundamental "336" and "148" patents that are literally the design foundation on which the vast majority of ALL microprocessors, micro controllers, Digital Signal Processors (DSP's), embedded processors and System-on-Chip (SoC) implementations are made. Without use of what is described and legally protected in both the 336 and 148 patents; billions upon billions of dollars in consumer electronic goods sold annually simply would not exists. There is good reason that the handful of 20+ prudent proactive companies (out of hundreds notified) licence the MMP Portfolio without much fanfare or resistance, some of which paid in excess of $20 to $30 Million dollars.
09/27/2007
The TPL Group Files Appeal to Reverse Markman Claim Construction for US '584 Patent in MMP™ Portfolio
Strategic Appeal Expected to Reverse Single US '584 "Instruction Groups" Claim Construction in US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
CUPERTINO, Calif. - Sept. 27, 2007 - As planned, the TPL Group today announced it has filed an appeal to reverse the June 18, 2007 Markman ruling regarding the "instruction groups" claim construction for US Patent 5,784,584 (US '584) in the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ (MMP) Portfolio. The appeal closely follows the stipulation proposed by TPL for a judgment of non-infringement of US '584. TPL urged entry of the judgment in order to simplify and streamline the MMP Portfolio infringement trial in the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas scheduled to take place in January 2008, and to enable an immediate appeal of the narrowly adverse Markman ruling regarding the single US '584 claim construction.
"As we have noted in prior public announcements, we believe that the claim construction for 'instruction groups' requires more scrutiny than the Texas Court was able to give it during the Markman hearing due to time and space constraints," said Dan Leckrone, Chairman of The TPL Group. "Apart from the need for further scrutiny on this single claim construction, the Texas Court demonstrated great skill in dissecting and dealing with a very complex case over a 15-month period. We believe the June 18th Markman ruling overwhelmingly supports MMP Portfolio claims against Matsu****a, Panasonic, JVC, Toshiba, and NEC entities."
As a result of the stipulation requested by TPL, the Texas Court infringement trial will focus on only two US patents in the MMP Portfolio, the 5,809,336 and the 6,598,148. TPL asserts that the June 18th Markman ruling broadly confirmed the strength of MMP claims including the very significant affirmation of US 5,809,336 as applied to both modern PLL-based and non PLL-based systems.
Leckrone Asserts "Misleading ARM News Release"
Leckrone noted that ARM issued a news release on September 20, 2007 that "was misleading" in that it implied the Texas Court somehow passed a judgment of non-infringement in favor of ARM. In point of fact, it was TPL who initiated the partial non-infringement stipulation to pave the way for a speedier trial and TPL's opportunity to appeal the single Markman ruling on the "instruction groups" claims construction. He declared, "The fact that TPL gave ARM a judgment of non-infringement was purely procedural as well as temporary until the reversal of the US '584 ruling."
According to Leckrone, all ARM core families (ARM7, ARM9, ARM9E, ARM10E, ARM11) and the ARM Cortex microprocessor core family do infringe upon the US '584 as well as US 5,440,749 in the MMP Portfolio. He warned that all manufacturers of end user products using infringing ARM processors - with the exception of the 20 global manufacturers who have already purchased MMP Portfolio licenses - are infringers of technology protected by the MMP Portfolio. "The longer infringers wait to purchase an MMP license, the more they can expect to pay because our program is designed to reward first-movers in various industry categories."
The sweeping scope of applications using MMP design techniques continues to encourage manufacturers of end user products from around the globe to become MMP licensees. Since January 2006, HP, Casio, Fujitsu, Sony, Nikon, Seiko Epson, Pentax, Olympus, Kenwood, Agilent, Lexmark, Schneider Electric, NEC Corporation, Funai Electric, SanDisk, Sharp Corporation, Nokia, Bull, LEGO Group, and Denso Wave have all purchased MMP Portfolio licenses.
About the MMP Portfolio
The Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio contains intellectual property that is jointly owned by the privately-held TPL Group and publicly-held Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB: PTSC). The portfolio includes seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts. It is becoming widely recognized that the jointly-owned patents protect fundamental technology used in designing microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs), embedded processors and system-on-chip (SoC) devices. The MMP Portfolio is exclusively managed by Alliacense, a TPL Group Enterprise.
About The TPL Group
Founded in 1988, Technology Properties Limited (The TPL Group) has emerged as a global coalition of high technology enterprises involved in the development, management and commercialization of Intellectual Property (IP) assets as well as the design, manufacture and sales of proprietary products based on these same IP assets. Among the advanced products that The TPL Group enterprises continue to bring to market are system-on-chip solutions for distributed digital media processing applications. For more information, visit www.tplgroup.net.
Media Contact:
Tom Rigoli, Mindpik, Inc.
rigoli@mindpik.com
650-969-5986
http://www.tplgroup.net/news/release.php?MarkhamAppeal.txt |
Edited by - Incite on 09/29/2007 14:25:28 |
|
|
|
d2006s
Nano Newbie
4 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
So in your opinion these patents are iron clad?
I don't have an engineering backround so I do not know if the prior art cited by the defendants is valid now based on the KSR decision.
Also not sure how the Judge will way in on the Higgins/Shaw/Hamilton motion.
Would appreciate your incite here.
Do you post anywhere else? I have read your posts regarding PTSC on "this" board, many many times.
Who are you??? lol
TIA and GLTY (assuming you're invested in PTSC?) |
Edited by - d2006s on 10/16/2007 01:53:19 |
|
|
|
2cats
Nano Newbie
1 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
With the announcement today that Phillips has acquired a license, the following reference to an upcoming trial is made:
“It’s pretty common to see the pace of deals pick up as a trial approaches,” said Mike Davis, senior vice president, licensing. “A number of major businesses that have been following the case closely needed a little time to evaluate the recent Markman ruling, and are now moving to capture licenses at current prices and avoid significantly higher royalty rates following trial.”
Please give some details about the upcoming trial, ie when, where, who, etc.
thanks in advance. |
|
|
|
BaNos
New Poster
6 Posts
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
In my opinion...Yes,
Iron Clad indeed.
You don't need a background in engineering to determine the value of the MMP Portfolio.
All that you need is the ability to recognize the views and opinions of the hundreds of people employed by those companies which have wisely licensed the MMP, who not only have a background, but have degrees in engineering, business, as well as patent law among others.
Best in class professionals recruited worldwide, who were hired explicitly for their views and opinions.
Expert views and opinions that have resulted in a highly probable licensing total of hundreds of millions in MMP licensing dollars to date.
I wouldn't be surprised if more new prospective licensees who have bargained in good faith are signed in the coming days, weeks and months.
Nor will I be surprised if those companies who persist to resist and refuse to make any bargaining commitments in regard to the MMP are named as defendants in an all new infringement suit.
Only now the stakes will be higher.
The vast majority of companies notified of infringement have yet to licence, including some pretty big fish along the lines of IBM, Apple, Microsoft and Motorola to name a few.
Over $108 million in total license fees for MMP licenses were signed back in calender year 2006, from just twelve companies. After allowance for expenses, the distributive share received by Patriot Scientific was over $48 million..
These licence's were specifically allocated at a discount to first movers in their respective market segments for their prudent action.
To date in 2007 there have been thirteen signatory companies, prior to the confidential settlement between TPL/PTSC and the remaining defendants -- (Toshiba, Matsu****a and JVC), reached just days ago. http://au.us.biz.yahoo.com/bw/071218/20071218005394.html?.v=1
And now just a few days later, there is yet another company to licence the MMP Portfolio. http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/071221/20071221005299.html?.v=1 .
Excerpt from today's news - .
["A strong wave of interest from companies selling microprocessor-based products has propelled the MMP Portfolio licensing program to the next level, as over 45% of license signings have followed the favorable Marksman ruling issued earlier this summer.”
The sweeping scope of applications using MMP Portfolio design techniques continues to encourage the world’s leading manufacturers of end user products from around the globe to become MMP Portfolio licensees. ]
I am quite certain that the favorable Marksman ruling was the catalyst in bringing the remaining Japanese defendants to the table.
It is now clear more than ever to the hundreds of companies formally notified of infringement, that there is a very simple solution to avoiding the very real possibility of supply-chain disruptions.
PTSC is accumulating a massive war chest after realizing just a fraction of it's MMP licensing potential, while actively seeking to invest in other industry related revenue streams. (personally, I hope they go solar)
Anyway, no debt with very little overhead and nothing seemingly standing in their way, it appears that PTSC is about to turn the corner and do what I and many longs have felt this company would do for quite some time.
I can hardly wait for 2008...
GLTAL old and new,
and a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
|
Edited by - Incite on 12/22/2007 12:22:47 |
|
|
|
BaNos
New Poster
6 Posts
|
|
|
d2006s
Nano Newbie
4 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Incite,
Thanks so much for replying to my question pertaining to the patents being Iron Clad. Awesome reply.
I believe that once the Street can see the Cash and PTSC can forcast future revenues on an annual basis and even over the next 5 years at a minimum, we will see the SP Greatly appreciate.
Some have suggested that the J3 have "possibly" paid a "portion" now and will pay More if and when the PTO reaffirm/validate the 336, 148 and the 584.
Do you have an opinion on this? I have never heard of such a settlement agreement in IP cases but then I am not a Patent attorney.
Thanks again and please consider posting on Agoracom. We sure could do with your incredible Incite. lol
Thanks a million..........or MORE.
Deb |
|
|
|
BaNos
New Poster
6 Posts
|
|
|
BaNos
New Poster
6 Posts
|
|
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since the last post. Paradoxically, Patriot Scientific now has more potential than ever, despite the lowest share price in a long time. Check the Patriot Scientific website for recent developments, too numerous to mention here:
http://www.ptsc.com/
One thing worth mentioning is that three insiders bought substantial amounts of shares on the open market on Thursday and Friday, 20 and 21 November, 2008. Two board members, Felcyn and Johnson, and the Director of Business Development, Bibeau. Look out for more.
|
|
|
|
wildman
Nano Newbie
3 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
This board has been very quite. Now it's time to rev it up with the USPTO re-certifications.
I believe in the future of PTSC. I have held ptsc for the last 10 years and I have traded the stock on and off. For the most part it has treated me good. Now I believe that I was smart to acquire as many shares as I did while the stock was in the .10 range. I will now hold many of my shares for the long term. I can tell you that this week has been a week of dreaming BIG.
Over the last few months I have watched 2 different stocks move from .14 and .15 to $7.00 and $10.00. I believe the ptsc train will soon leave the station. |
|
|
|
GeorgeM
Senior Poster
84 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
| Anytime somebody talks about a train leaving a station I immediately lose interest. |
|
|
|
rjayem
New Poster
9 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
OK then, how about "don't miss the bus", lol!?
Subsequent to your post we have had re-certification of the 336 patent by the USPTO, the most important of the whole MMP portfolio, after what seems like an eternity of re-exams, plus, earlier this week, a PR detailing three new license sighings. Stock has appreciated 300 per cent since the last post on this forum.
|
|
|
|
Incite
Senior Poster
112 Posts
|
View Profile
| Reply
|
Excerpt from TPL Website October 5th Press Release:
Wave of MMP Portfolio™ Licensees on the Heels of Reexam Success
CUPERTINO, Calif. – October 5, 2009 – Alliacense announced today a wave of new MMP™Portfolio licensees less than three weeks after the USPTO announced it's decision to affirm the validity of US’336, the most widely recognized patent in the MMP Portfolio. The new licensees include Harman International, TPV Technology, and Textron Inc., and will result in both upfront and future payments, as the increasing rates of the MMP Licensing Program has made onetime, lump-sum licenses too expensive for some companies.
The agreements come on the heels of a string of successes in the reexamination of the MMP Portfolio™ patents by the USPTO and German Patent Court. In the past 9 months, the German Patent Court affirmed the validity of EP’730, and the USPTO has affirmed the validity of both US’584 and most recently US’336.
Despite the risk of willful infringement in cases where companies delay licensing decisions on the basis of reexams, hundreds of companies have been awaiting the outcome of US’336 and are now reengaging in licensing discussions in light of the escalating royalty rate structure of the MMP Portfolio™ Licensing Program.
http://www.tplgroup.net:8080/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=248:wave-of-mmp-portf...
"hundreds of companies have been awaiting the outcome of US’336 and are now reengaging in licensing discussions in light of the escalating royalty rate structure of the MMP Portfolio™ Licensing Program."
Except from: Patriot Scientific Corp · 10-K · For 5/31/09
Filed On 8/14/09 4:16pm ET · SEC File 0-22182 · Accession Number 1019687-9-2922
X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended May 31, 2009
From the inception of the Commercialization Agreement to May 31, 2009, license revenues to PDS totaled $259,554,380.
IMO: Dozens of companies yielded more than a quarter billion dollars in license revenues to PDS. All of these licenses were contracted prior to the affirmation of the reexaminations and most if not all were at a substantial discount; which begs the question... Just how much will hundreds of companies bring at market rates?
|
Edited by - Incite on 10/29/2009 00:10:05 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Nanalyze Forums |
© Nanalyze |
|
|
|
|
PTSC- Patriot Scientific
