Isn't this the same as this
http://priuschat.com/index.php?showtopic=14788&hl=solomon

I see, thanks

It's clear from wandering through various patents over the last ten
years or so that a lot of people were working on very similar things,
taking slightly different approaches here and there but basically
barking up the same tree. If they threw half the money they're
spending on lawyers into forward-looking research and improvements,
we'd be so much farther ahead in general...
.
_H*

I'm just guessing, but if it's between opening up their wallet, or banning imports, I'm sure Toyota would settle the matter...

http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=050679...ey=188CBE485B73


strange.. what's everyone opinions on the design? sure.. i see a clear 3 gears that all overlap each other... but.. uh... i say it's not a match.

hmmm wonder if gm is behind all this

Google, Smith & Nephew, L-3: Intellectual Property - BusinessWeek

I'm with Hobbit on this one. Had there been a fraction of the energy spent on developing some of these patents, we'd be so much further along. But a similar situation occurred with NiMH batteries. So much technology wasted for so little value gained.

Bob Wilson

paice could never do anything with it because it was trc's idea and they let the patent run out. paice picked it up and added a few things. toyota made it all work and it's a simple matter of who blinks first. paice wants as much money as they can get, toyota wants to pay them as little as possible. both want toyota to keep selling hybrids. in the end, the consumer always loses.

There is never a "ban on import or sale". There is often a "reasonable fee paid" following such a loss (if it happens). Sometimes the court will decide what "reasonable" means if the two parties can't.

What about Ford? They licensed the HSD design from Toyota when they discovered they may have infringed. Will they also have to bow down to some hick company? Or did their agreement involve some other part of the system?

Interesting post that inspired me to do a little 'back of the envelope' calculations:

• 152 gal/yr - gasoline saved of a 52 MPG Prius vs 34 MPG Echo doing 15,000 miles per year
• $418/yr - fuel savings at $2.75/gal

So how much is the Paice patent claim worth? I understand they were getting $25/car or ~6% of the first year's fuel savings.

Bob Wilson

good question. each consumer has their own variables when shopping. another factor that comes into play is competition. $25./car is peanuts. what if it's $1,000./car and honda or others improve their offerings at a lower price?
i also wonder about ford, but from what i've read about this patent judge in texas, they have nothing to worry about.

That savings is the sum of many, likely hundreds, of innovations. Paice's patent cannot take credit for the entire amount.

I get the impression that the Trade Commission is not as Draconian as the Kodak vs. Polaroid suit or the NiMH prismatic battery size limiting suit. Regardless, anything in the $25-50 range and I don't see a big 'show stopper.' Then everyone can wait for the patent expiration.

Bob Wilson

Old thread, but you made me look.

The solution was obvious. The patent holder actually wanted the technology to move forward, and only wanted at reasonable amount for its intellectual property. Toyota wanted it for free, but with the help of the FTC did the right thing. Its a win win.

The NiMH patent was sold to a bad actor that did not want the technology to be used. There is no easy solution there.

This kind of stuff goes on all the time with big corporations. But the US govt seems intent on denting Toyota's US car market, so every little bit helps. Too bad it doesn't seem to be working. Maybe the public dislikes the govt more than Toyota. LOL.