Patent suit not good for US Prius imports

[RodJo]

I have attached the PDF of the ITC complaint for your reading pleasure.

The complaint is based on infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,343,970 (also attached), which expires in just over 3 years. In addition to the Gen 3 Prius, the complaint seeks to halt imports of the Camry Hybrid, and Lexus HS250h and RX450h.

Because of the successful litigation and Toyota's admissions, the complex patent issues should not have to be determined by the ITC. That may streamline the process and Paice states that it will seek a summary determination as early as October. So it could take much less than the 15-18 months previously reported.

[Rybold]

International Trade Commission may temporarily ban imports of the Prius pending a court decision:

Here's a summary for those that don't want to read the article:
In a previous lawsuit against Toyota by Paice LLC, claiming patent infringement, a U.S. Federal Judge declined to block Prius imports during the trial. However, there is a new lawsuit, filed with the International Trade Commission, and modus operandi for the ITC is to block imports until a verdict can be reached. The ITC just announced that they will hear the case. So, this means that Prius imports may be blocked by court order pending a verdict. This could cause Prius prices to skyrocket in the United States. If you want a new Prius, you might have to bring a briefcase with you and talk to the guy standing on the corner.

Toyota U.S. Patent Trade Case Over Hybrid Considered (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

.

[TonyPSchaefer]

Originally Posted by Rybold

International Trade Commission may temporarily ban imports of the Prius pending a court decision.

This is all the more reason to build them in the U.S.

Get it? it was a joke.
If they build them here they won't need to import them.
Meh; if you have to explain it it's just not funny.

[bwilson4web]

. . .
To be able to win at the ITC, Paice must show that it has a market to protect. In the complaint, Paice says it has made “substantial investments” in vendors and suppliers and in research and licensing.
. . .

Paice appears to make no products and the patent is still in appeals. But they have been getting $98/car in royalties. Understand I would be more sympathetic if Paice had built something that shows the technology.

There is a big difference between a paper and having at least a research vehicle. But I suspect Paice is also aware of the patents they too would have to license to build a practical vehicle. Patent sitting, the clock is ticking.

Bob Wilson

[Rybold]

Originally Posted by bwilson4web

Paice appears to make no products and the patent is still in appeals. But they have been getting $98/car in royalties. Understand I would be more sympathetic if Paice had built something that shows the technology.

There is a big difference between a paper and having at least a research vehicle. But I suspect Paice is also aware of the patents they too would have to license to build a practical vehicle. Patent sitting, the clock is ticking.

Bob Wilson

That means that $98 of that check that you wrote to Toyota went to Paice.
Maybe someone can setup a class action lawsuit to get your money back.

[garygid]

Oops!

[Slovewell]

Originally Posted by PriusLewis

It would be interesting to investigate the history of the patent. Toyota (and Ford) use the design thought up by TRW in 1970. I don't know if TRW patented it, or if the patent was kept up. I find it interesting that someone else basically infringed on TRW with their patent for any drivetrain that uses both a gasoline and electric motor.

You cannot patent a concept (such as trying to patent the idea of a hybrid drivetrain). All you can patent is a device or an application of a concept. So I would be surprised if this patent directly addresses the use of 3 inputs (1 gas and 2 electric) and 3 outputs (the 2 electric as generators, and one to power the vehicle) through a planetary transmission, which is exactly what TRW originally invented. If, in fact, the patent drawing shows an in-line design, if I were Toyota I'd for sure fight it (and the company should be going after Honda instead of Toyota).

I really agree with you. No one should be allowed to patent the hybrid idea. Toyota should just bury them. Also, Toyota should get the other car makers to join in and pool their resources against these money hungry people.

[usbseawolf2000]

The patent expires on Sept 15th 2012. They are trying to milk more because $100 per hybrid is not enough.

[bwilson4web]

There is a pretty good write-up over at hybridCars:

Expert Explains Toyota?s Hybrid Patent Problems | Hybrid Cars

But the ITC could just let it fall back to the court, and say Paice is already getting their royalties. For the future vehicles, there’s a decent likelihood that they’ll get similar royalties. And let it stand there.

That could happen. The district court in Texas said back in 2005 to Paice: “You were seeking a license from Toyota on this technology, which demonstrates that money damages are an adequate remedy here. Here’s your license.” And it could be in the second proceeding [regarding Toyota’s more recent crop of hybrids] that the district court turns around and does what it did in 2005. Here are compulsory licenses on these new vehicles. The real point here is, unless and until Paice can prevent Toyota from bringing those vehicles into the country, they don’t have as strong a position for licensing the technology as they want. If they can get the ITC to put a ban in place, then all the sudden the balance of negotiating strength goes to Paice.

Sounds like an attempt to renegotiate the earlier court settlement.

Bob Wilson

[RodJo]

Originally Posted by bwilson4web

There is a pretty good write-up over at hybridCars:

Expert Explains Toyota?s Hybrid Patent Problems | Hybrid Cars


Sounds like an attempt to renegotiate the earlier court settlement.

Bob Wilson

I agree that the linked article gives a good discussion of the issues and process. Anyone interested should probably read it.

HOWEVER, the 2005 case did not involve the Gen III Prius or the other hybrids at issue because they did not exist. Toyota does not have a license and is not paying any royalty on the new vehicles. That's the whole point. While there is another infringement suit involving the newer hybrids, there is no decision and thus nothing to "attempt to renegotiate...." In fact, if there were a license then the ITC would be powerless.