Lost legal case could disrupt import of Toyota hybrids

These links appear to have more details:

Toyota Loses Bid to End Paice Dispute Over Hybrids (Update1) - BusinessWeek

http://www.caradvice.com.au/69179/toyota-still-in-patent-dispute-over-hybrid-technology/

Bob Wilson

 

These guys are looking for as much royalties as they can get. I rather doubt they will ban imports.

 

The issue will be resolved when money changes hands. Sorry there won't be any disruption in sales.

 

If I had a buck for every case that was over turned on appeal, I'd be driving a Tesla. It aint over 'till it's over, & the fat lady has a long way to go before she sings. That said, I was just looking at the Paice web site. Pretty sparce:

Paice: An Early Pioneer in Hybrid Vehicle Technology

But the part that caught my eye:

So it seems that yes, they WERE actually around for a while. But if Paice worked out deals with ford (GM's tinkering w/ hybrids never went any where) ... one would think that Ford & Toyota's cross licensing would incorporate any aspect that Paice had with ford.

Then there's the whole thing with Paice's inventer guy, supposedly working on his hybrid idea since 1979 ?!? Talk about your johnny come lately. GM was playing with hybrids since the 1960's. Maybe GM ought to sue Paice ... for stealing THEIR idea(s)


.

 

Wow! . . . actually OVER 100 years ago - 1st built in 1898 ... going to a full series hybrid by 1901:
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Porsche"]Ferdinand Porsche - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Now THAT's some serious royalties ... call Toyota ... stop production!

.

 

I doubt that Ford has the legal right to grant license rights to a third party's IP, only to its own.

 

This looks really marginal. As my thesis project in 1986 while at College, I was part of a team that built a hybrid car. With all the other prior art how on earth can the Paice Claim stand - Porsche, GM in the 60 and 70s - his own website admits to hiring from Ford and GM. Sometimes I wonder if any of our ideas from the Thesis project made it to Toyota as we were sponsored by Toyota (they gave us a Tercel), Varta for batteries and Fujitsu for high powered semi conductors and all our IP had to be shared by the school and sponsors. Myself and my partner wrote all the control S/W for the engines, batteries and charging logic.

 

Again if the final court decision comes down to PAICE being awarded additional royalties above the $98 they currently receive then Toyota will just pay up or make a lump sum payment.... or buy PAICE's patent outright. It's only money. Sales won't stop. If they double the royalty rate to $198 per unit well the retail price will simply go up.

 

that's why it will be surprising to see another company come up with a hybrid as efficient as toyota's. unless the license from paice, but there are probably a lot of toyota patent's aswell.

 

I'm pretty sure the Paice patent was sustained on the use a microprocessor to control the system. The power split device comes from an earlier TRW patent but it lacked a computer controller.

In terms of efficiency, I am impressed by the number of home-made, plug-in Prius being assembled and running. They are demonstrating exceptional mileage, granted at limited ranges, but still doing great. They may not be a 'one size fits all,' but within their range limitations, impressive.

Bob Wilson

 

i thought i read that trw never used it and never re patented. then paice came along and picked it up? article could have been wrong.
i also read you go to a special judge in texas to protect american patents and usually win. funny thing is, the paice guy is an EE from russia!

 

Sept 2011 is when this patent will expire.

 

:rockon:

:cheer2: arty: :whoo: :clap2:

.

 

I hope the 2012 refresh model has plenty of improvements with this $98 patent out of the way.

 

One way to revive the American car industry is to eliminate the foreign competition.
Don't laugh.

 

First, they must lobby Congress to drastically lengthened the time limits on patents, then apply those limits retroactively.

I think only Big Pharma has the lobbying budget to pull off the former, and even they don't do the later.

 

Didn't we have a thread on this a few weeks ago? (yeah, I know the court case had a recent change, but it's the same court case)

Anyhow, I really don't think the U.S. Govt is actually going to enforce this one on Toyota. With the importance that Obama has emphasized on hybrids and being green, and the recent oil spill negative P.R., I really don't think the head of the commission that would actually be implementing this ban is going to implement it this time. I think Toyota will also argue that the defendant does not even have a product in competition in the market place.