🚀 go-pugleaf

[repost of a repost, as it wasn't propigating properly]

= The following netnews I found in comp.dcom.modems, I am reposting it
= here.  Dont e-mail me, as I am simply reposting it.  Dan_Jacobson@ATT.COM.

|From: tnixon@hayes.uucp
|Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
|Subject: Re: Hayes Microcomputer lawsuit???
|Date: 30 Jan 91 01:31:51 GMT
|Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
|
|In article <1510@public.BTR.COM>, cec@public.BTR.COM (Cerafin E.
|Castillo  cec@btr.com) writes: 
|
|> I recently heard that Hayes Microcomputer was in the midst of a lawsuit
|> in regards to technology it (Hayes) develops, sells, or licenses.  I did
|> not catch any specifics since it was mentioned on a stock market report
|> and technical or company comments were not made known.
|> 
|> Can anyone enlighten me on this issue?  Toby, what is the company line?
|
|Briefly, Hayes, like many modem companies (including Telebit), holds
|a number of patents related to modem technology we invented.  Other 
|companies who wish to incorporate this technology into their 
|products must license the associated patent from Hayes.  One such 
|patent is the Heatherington '302 patent, "Modem with Improved Escape 
|Sequence", which relates to the guard time associated with the "+++" 
|escape sequence used to change the modem from online to command 
|state.  Many modem companies have licensed this patent from Hayes, 
|since it is considered to be an essential feature of modems which 
|can truthfully claim to be "Hayes compatible".
|
|The case you've heard about recently involves a patent infringement 
|suit filed a number of years ago by Hayes against four companies 
|which, despite being information by Hayes that their products 
|infringed the patent, refused to obtain licenses and pay royalties.  
|In fact, some of these companies sued Hayes FIRST, saying we were 
|attempting to monopolize the modem market (a ridiculous contention, 
|and their suit was thrown out by summary judgement a while back).  
|This suit came to trial in early January.  One of the four 
|companies, Prometheus, settled and licensed the patent the day 
|before the trail started.
|
|Last Friday, the jury returned their verdict, finding that the 
|patent is valid, and that the remaining three companies (Everex, 
|Omnitel, and Ventel) had willfully infringed it.  The total damages 
|awarded to Hayes by the jury was $3.5 million, to which will be 
|added interest.  Also, because of the finding of willful 
|infringement, the judge may decide to treble the damages, and also 
|award attorneys fees and other litigation costs.  There is also the 
|possibility that the infringers will be enjoined (prevented) from 
|manufacturing any more products that infringe the patent, until they 
|obtain licenses (which Hayes is under no legal obligation to grant).
|
|I really can't comment further than this, because there is still the
|potential that the defendants will appeal, so the matter is still
|technically in litigation. 
|
|Hayes also has a suit pending against Multitech for infringing the 
|same patent.
|
|-- 
|Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer    | Voice   +1-404-449-8791  Telex 151243420
|Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax     +1-404-447-0178  CIS   70271,404
|P.O. Box 105203                   | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  AT&T    !tnixon
|Atlanta, Georgia  30348  USA      | Internet       hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net
-- 
Dan_Jacobson@ATT.COM  Naperville IL USA  +1 708-979-6364