On 7/12/2012 8:52 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012 11:33:03 GMT, Han wrote:


One rough answer is this:
There is a 25% rule that people use to "ballpark" royalties. The rule
suggests that the licensee should pay 25% of profits resulting from the
license to the license.

That's likely an answer given by someone with a patent who wants as
much as they can rape ya for. Maybe someone with a recent metric
****load of "skin sensing technology" patents for a tablesaur. It's
outrageously high.

Obviously that is subject to a lot of interpretation, definition and
negotiation, as it is doubtful whoever had the patent on the
intermittent windshield wiper was paid 25% of the profit on a car.

That said, if there is one thing generally accepted in business these
days it is that our patent system is broken and has been subverted by
none other than lawyers like Gass, particularly regarding
technology/software patents.

It is to the point of absurdity, at unbelievable cost to the consumer
and innovation ... for the past decade or so the patent office,
underfunded and grossly inept in the usual bureaucratic manner, has been
operating under the concept that they will patent anything presented to
them, and let anyone affected by their ineptness fight it out in the
courts, benefiting no one but guess who? ... asshat lawyers, like Gass.

A pox on the greedy *******s ...

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop