nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verisign vs. ICANN
From: Joe Rhett <jrhett () meer net>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:18:27 -0700
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 04:01:46PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
If the patent is strong enough, wouldnt some patent attorney be willing to defend it on a contingency basis? With the potential $$ in a patent violation judgement against verisign, I would think attorneys would be all over it.
Patent violation can be easily gathered, but the penalty is always based on the lost revenue, which must be documented and validated. In short, if you want to make money selling your patent to someone then you must have a valid business that loses money so that your lawsuit against them will have teeth. -- Joe Rhett Senior Geek Meer.net
Current thread:
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Matthew Sullivan (Sep 09)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Sep 09)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Dan Hollis (Sep 09)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Joe Rhett (Sep 10)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Dan Hollis (Sep 10)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Joe Rhett (Sep 10)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Dan Hollis (Sep 10)
- Re: Verisign vs. ICANN Joe Rhett (Sep 10)