1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Legalities

Discussion in 'Gen 2 Prius Main Forum' started by bredekamp, Oct 20, 2007.

  1. bredekamp

    bredekamp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    569
    12
    10
    Location:
    Somerset West, South Africa
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    I just found out Chevron is sitting on NiMH battery patents cause they can and they sued Toyota to stop making the NiMH batteries for the RAV4 EV. Is this true?

    How then does Toyota now make the NiMH batteries for the Prius, does Panasonic have their own patents? Could this patent BULLSHIT delay the Li-Ion batteries for the next Prius?

    Don't tell me oil companies don't sit with patents in their vaults that can make us all drive for free with zero emissions...bastards.
     
    #1 bredekamp, Oct 20, 2007
  2. donee

    donee New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    2,956
    197
    0
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    III
    Hi Albertus,

    Its my scuttlebutt understanding that the legal settlement between Chevron and Toyota allows Toyota a license to make NiMH batteries, for compensation, that does not displace more than 1/2 of the petroleum fuel that would otherwise be used. Which was the design goal, and realization of the Prius.

    This was all part of the EV1 crushing, actually. GM bought Ovonics to have the EV1 batteries inhouse, but then when they divested themselves of Electric Vehicles, they sold the battery division off to Texaco, which merged with Chevron. Or at least, that is again, my scuttlebut understanding.

    I belive this is why the CEO of GM at the time now admidts that the EV1 dismemberment was the biggest single mistake of his carrer. Its why GM may not be able to do the Volt, when if they would have proceeded with the EV2 hybrid, they would be even steve with Toyota at this time, with production fuel economy products. The EV2 hybrid was basically the Volt with NiMH batteries.
     
    #2 donee, Oct 20, 2007
  3. dogfriend

    dogfriend Human - Animal Hybrid

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    7,512
    1,185
    0
    Location:
    Carmichael, CA
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    #3 dogfriend, Oct 21, 2007
  4. bredekamp

    bredekamp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    569
    12
    10
    Location:
    Somerset West, South Africa
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dogfriend @ Oct 21 2007, 06:05 AM) [snapback]528346[/snapback]</div>
    OK, looks like they didn't cut the NiMH supply off completely. That's something at least.

    "A 2001 patent infringement lawsuit brought by ECD Ovonics and Ovonic Battery Company, Inc. against Matsushita, Toyota, and PEVE was settled in July 2004. Settlement terms called for cross-licensing between parties of current and future NiMH-related patents filed through December 31, 2014. The terms did not allow Matushita, Toyota, and PEVE to sell certain NiMH batteries for transportation applications in North America until the second half of 2007, and commercial quantities of certain NiMH batteries in North America until the second half of 2010. Additionally, Ovonic Battery Co. and ECD Ovonics received a $10 million patent license fee, Cobasys received a $20 million patent license fee, $16 million of which was earmarked to reimburse legal expenses, and Cobasys would receive royalties on certain batteries sold by Matushita/PEVE in North America.[31]

    Licensing terms were expanded in 2005, with PEVE granted further license to sell NiMH batteries for certain transportation applications in North America, in exchange for royalties paid to Cobasys through 2014."

    It looks like some of the limitations are allready falling away. Is Toyota perhaps waiting for the last limitation "until the second half of 2010" to fall away?
     
    #4 bredekamp, Oct 21, 2007
  5. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Remember also that that patent is strictly for specific NiMH designs and won't apply to new Li designs. That said, you can expect that whomever is most successful with their Li design will put a strangle hold on that technology too. Let's just hope that it ends up being used for good and not for evil!
     
    #5 efusco, Oct 21, 2007
  6. bredekamp

    bredekamp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    569
    12
    10
    Location:
    Somerset West, South Africa
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Oct 21 2007, 10:26 AM) [snapback]528393[/snapback]</div>
    Angels and ministers of grace defend us! - Hamlet, Shakespeare

    The new Li-ion designs from A123 systems are exciting and, for now at least, they seem to be the good guys. Until some oil executive sticks a check in their hands that is....bastards! Oil companies, in my opinion, are no different to playground bullies.
    Some really good things the Prius did was that it:

    1) made the American car industry get of their asses
    2) paved the way for more hybrids
    3) showed that hybrids are practical
    4) stimulated battery development, which eventually could lead to more EVs

    So the the Prius' impact was almost more political than environmental. Go Japs Go!
     
    #6 bredekamp, Oct 21, 2007
  7. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Albertus @ Oct 21 2007, 03:57 AM) [snapback]528395[/snapback]</div>
    GM is the bastard here...they've already 'partnered' with A123 and stand to hold the keys to that technology. If they decide to "pull another EV1" and crush the Volt and then not allow anyone else to buy/use the A123 Li technology we'll be little better off. The only good thing is that there seem to be multiple companies really pushing this technology..it's practically a race. And the auto manufacturers are all positioning themselves to take advantage when one of them seems to take the lead, and to stake their claim to their share of each new patent.



    I think this train is rolling and is unlikely to be stopped despite the best efforts of "Big Oil" or "Big Auto", but they can still slow things down unless we all keep the pressure on to make these things a reality.
     
    #7 efusco, Oct 21, 2007
  8. bredekamp

    bredekamp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    569
    12
    10
    Location:
    Somerset West, South Africa
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Oct 21 2007, 11:02 AM) [snapback]528397[/snapback]</div>
    Is there any danger, in you opinion, of Toyota being left high and dry without a suitable battery technology?
    Could they be pushed out by unreasonable royalty demands?
     
    #8 bredekamp, Oct 21, 2007
  9. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Albertus @ Oct 21 2007, 04:06 AM) [snapback]528399[/snapback]</div>
    I seriously doubt it...I don't know, off the top of my head, who they've been working with, but I'm sure they're positioning themselves well....hope so anyway!
     
    #9 efusco, Oct 21, 2007
  10. apriusfan

    apriusfan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    6,050
    205
    0
    Location:
    S.F. Bay Area
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Oct 21 2007, 02:09 AM) [snapback]528401[/snapback]</div>
    Or, while not having access to the latest and greatest battery technology, a business model could be constructed around lighter weight components that allow longer range with the battery technology that is available.

    That said, the key for GM is to not make stupid decisions.... Like assuming gas prices wouldn't rise above $3.00/gallon.... That little determination (plus all of the wishful thinking that went along with it) cost GM dearly in market share.
     
    #10 apriusfan, Oct 21, 2007
  11. patsparks

    patsparks An Aussie perspective

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    10,664
    567
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide South Australia
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Maybe a law can be passed to prohibit the siloing of inovation. If a patented idea isn't used by the patent owner then it becomes free for anyone to use. Maybe this shouldn't be the case for the inventor but for anyone who purchased an idea.
    Just my thought on how this wasteful practice can be terminated.
     
    #11 patsparks, Oct 21, 2007
  12. donee

    donee New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    2,956
    197
    0
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    III
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(patsparks @ Oct 21 2007, 09:53 AM) [snapback]528417[/snapback]</div>
    Hi Patsparks,

    Well, free is not proper either. It should be "available" for anybody to use, for 5 % or so, of the resulting product profit to the original inventor (not the assignee). In other words, the assignee looses the rigtht to decide who gets to use it. And the license fee is then "just compensation" to the original inventor. This way assignee's would be motivated to do something with it, or loose their assignee status.





    The main issue is that assignee's can have conflict of interest with their present product. Which results in an anti-competitive envriorment. And anti-competitive activity is against the law in the U.S. . Which is why Cobasys had to make a deal with PEVE/Toyota. Capatilism does not work unless the market is free.

    Besides that, non-use of a patent cheats the original patent inventor. And as these inventors are usually employee's of the assignee's, its unfair to limit their careers if the assignee is unwilling, or do not have the competence to take advantage of the invention. So, this law modification would create a decoupling between the inventor and the assignee if the invention is truely advantagous to society. Which is the spirit of patent law in the first place.

    So, there are two basis for the above patent law modifications.
     
    #12 donee, Oct 21, 2007
  13. bredekamp

    bredekamp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    569
    12
    10
    Location:
    Somerset West, South Africa
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Thanks for the legal insight donee. Thank GOD for legislation that prevent anti competitive practices and monopolies. The US free market system works!
     
    #13 bredekamp, Oct 21, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)