CompuServe Messages

"If they let C= "get away" with not paying, then IBM could claim that they had abandoned the patent, and would refuse to pay." Not true, Andrew. Assuming this story is true, the patentholder could easily decide not to collect delinquent royalties without endangering their patent rights in any way, shape or manner. All they would have to do is write it off as uncollectible. That's a business decision has nothing to do with their basic patent rights. Any reasonably well drawn license agreement would terminate automatically for non-payment. Only if a licensee continued to use the licensed, but unpaid for technology, would the licensor have to sue and even then it would be for breach of contract, not to protect the rights under patent. The burden of proof to prove abandonment of a trademark, copyright or patent is very substantial. In one trademark case I read, the trademark hadn't been used in 15 years, but the registration was still valid and its owner collected a multi-million dollar judgement against an infringer. Patents afford far greater protection than trademark registrations. Just failing to sue someone for money owed under a license is not going to invalidate or sustain a charge of abandonment of a patent. I'm not even sure a patent can be abandoned, since as far as I know there is no requirement that a patented item even be sold in commerce. Jerry