(Total Views: 652)
Posted On: 05/28/2017 1:55:19 PM
Post# of 22465
Seriously? You're arguing semantics?
"What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention."
The freedom to operate is associated with being able to make something without being sued. Yes, they chose the above words to demonstrate that IP is protected by a patent. The above statement says that you can sue others that make your IP.
We're talking about the same things here, but clearly we are using different viewpoints or interpretations.
Yes, Nanosys sued Nanoco and QD Vision. Why? Because they all use the same product in method. Look up the lawsuits. QMC has a completely different production method.
"What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention."
The freedom to operate is associated with being able to make something without being sued. Yes, they chose the above words to demonstrate that IP is protected by a patent. The above statement says that you can sue others that make your IP.
We're talking about the same things here, but clearly we are using different viewpoints or interpretations.
Yes, Nanosys sued Nanoco and QD Vision. Why? Because they all use the same product in method. Look up the lawsuits. QMC has a completely different production method.
(0)
(0)
