Patriot Scientific der Highflyer 2006


Seite 91 von 343
Neuester Beitrag: 25.04.21 00:07
Eröffnet am:03.07.06 17:32von: joker67Anzahl Beiträge:9.552
Neuester Beitrag:25.04.21 00:07von: UtexzfsaLeser gesamt:1.583.891
Forum:Hot-Stocks Leser heute:48
Bewertet mit:
57


 
Seite: < 1 | ... | 88 | 89 | 90 |
| 92 | 93 | 94 | ... 343  >  

241 Postings, 6850 Tage Scarmacedie Stimming scheint ja ganz gut zu sein

 
  
    #2251
17.12.07 17:16
Is ja auch Weihnachtszeit und dahaben sich alle lieb. Schon satte 15% rauf.  

8140 Postings, 7146 Tage checkerlarsenund vor allem hübsch gegen den markttrend

 
  
    #2252
17.12.07 18:02
und das mit mit mini umsätzen.
mal schauen ob wirklich was noch DIESE woche rauskommt....
ich galube den satz in dieser woche gibt es eine entscheidung, steht in dem thread 346 mal...  

249 Postings, 6840 Tage neureich13New Pacer - Sealed (verschlossen)

 
  
    #2253
17.12.07 23:54
http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666354#message:

New pacer..Sealed Motion
Full docket text for document 365:
SEALED MOTION for Entry of Order by Technology Properties Limitied, Inc.,, Patriot Scientific Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.,, Matsushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd.,, Panasonic Corporation of North America,, JVC Americas Corporation,, Toshiba Corporation.,, Toshiba America, Inc.,, Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc.,, Toshiba America Consumer Products, LLC.,. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order # (2) Exhibit A Part 1# (3) Exhibit A - Part 2)(Partridge, Scott)

http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666355#message
Full docket text for document 364:
Joint Sealed Document. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit)(Partridge, Scott

Wer glaubt, er durchblicke das - laß es mich wissen!

http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666410#message

Totale Konfusion momentan.  

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage NassieWichtig

 
  
    #2254
17.12.07 23:55
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES
LIMITED, INC. NOTICE
V.
FUJITSU LIMITED, ET AL.
CASE NUMBER: 2:05-CV-494(TJW)
TYPE OF CASE: CIVIL

TAKE NOTICE that a proceeding in this case has been set for the place, date, and time set forth below:
PLACE ROOM NO.
DATE AND TIME
TYPE OF PROCEEDING
PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE
TAKE NOTICE that a proceeding in this case has been continued as indicated below:

United States District Court
100 E. Houston Street
MARSHALL, TX 75670

DATE AND TIME PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED
December 17, 2007 @ 1:30 p.m.

CONTINUED TO DATE AND TIME
December 18, 2007 @ 2:30 p.m.

David J. Maland
US MAGISTRATE JUDGE OR CLERK OF COURT
December 11, 2007 Sonja H. Dupree
DATE (BY) DEPUTY CLERK
TO: ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD
 

6257 Postings, 7125 Tage mecanodie müssen noch 100% gehen, dann bin ich 00

 
  
    #2255
18.12.07 00:00
ein Segen nur Spielposi!!   -  spiel ich viel. zu oft ??  wonder wonder wonder ????

199 Postings, 7326 Tage kinu@ nassie

 
  
    #2256
18.12.07 00:03
klär mich doch bitte mal auf nassie - ich blicke gerade gar nix...
danke
kinu  

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage NassieIst schon jemandem aufgefallen,

 
  
    #2257
18.12.07 00:05
das in dem Pacer NEC nicht mit aufgeführt ist? Was hat das zu bedeuten ?  

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage NassieHallo Kinu

 
  
    #2258
18.12.07 00:07
morgen um 14 Uhr Texas-Zeit ist die PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE. Das bedeutet ca. 20 Uhr MEZ.
Bin mal gespannt was bei dem Gerichtstermin heraus kommt.
Der Pacer von vorhin ist leider versiegelt, so das wir warten müssen.  

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage NassieNews

 
  
    #2259
18.12.07 00:20
3rd New Pacer--STIPULATION TO DISMISS NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Technology Properties Limited and Patriot

Scientific Corporation,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Matsushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd.,

Panasonic Corporation of North America, JVC

Americas Corporation, NEC Electronics

America, Inc., Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba

America, Inc., Toshiba America Electronic

Components, Inc., Toshiba America

Information Systems, Inc. and Toshiba America

Consumer Products, LLC,

Defendants.

JURY DEMANDED
STIPULATION TO DISMISS NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-00494 (TJW) - 1 -
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) and (c), Plaintiffs Technology Properties Limited ("TPL") and Patriot Scientific Corporation ("Patriot") and Defendant NEC Electronics America, Inc. ("NECELAM") (collectively, “the Parties”), having resolved the issues between them, hereby stipulate and agree, through their respective counsel, that the remaining claims among these parties shall be dismissed, with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys' fees. Plaintiffs' claims shall be dismissed with prejudice and Defendant NECELAM’s counterclaims shall be dismissed without prejudice.

DATED: December 17, 2007 By: /s/ Roger L. Cook

TOWNSEND and TOWNSEND and CREW LLP

Roger L. Cook, CA State Bar No. 55208

Lead Counsel
 

6257 Postings, 7125 Tage mecanodissmiss also weiter abwärts ?

 
  
    #2260
18.12.07 00:30
soll ich jetzt mit Verlust raus - oder warten ?

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage NassiePacer

 
  
    #2261
18.12.07 00:33

4th New Pacer--(Not signed by Judge Ward) ORDER FOR DISMISSAL OF NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Technology Properties Limited and Patriot

Scientific Corporation,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Matsushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd.,

Panasonic Corporation of North America, JVC

Americas Corporation, NEC Electronics

America, Inc., Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba

America, Inc., Toshiba America Electronic

Components, Inc., Toshiba America

Information Systems, Inc. and Toshiba America

Consumer Products, LLC,

Defendants.

JURY DEMANDED

ORDER FOR DISMISSAL OF NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

Plaintiffs Technology Properties Limited and Patriot Scientific Corporation and Defendant NEC Electronics America, Inc. (“NECELAM”) have resolved the issues between them. For good cause, this Court HEREBY ORDERS that the remaining claims between these parties shall be dismissed, with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys' fees; and FURTHER ORDERS that Plaintiffs' claims against NECELAM are hereby dismissed with prejudice and Defendant NECELAM's counterclaims are dismissed without prejudice.



 

6257 Postings, 7125 Tage mecanoscheisse Patriot hat verloren

 
  
    #2262
18.12.07 00:36
"with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys' fees"

d.h. der letzte Anstieg war nur ne Wette auf das Urteil

was soll ich denn jetzt machen ? halten oder raus damit ?

16074 Postings, 8412 Tage Nassie@mecano

 
  
    #2263
18.12.07 00:39
Warum postest Du so einen Unsinn ? Dismissed bedeutet, das der Rechtsstreit beendet ist.
Das bedeutet eher, das man sich außergerichtlich geeinigt hat.  

199 Postings, 7326 Tage kinunec ist raus

 
  
    #2264
18.12.07 00:59
gut so, bin gespannt auf morgen
der zug nimmt so richtig fahrt auf...
danke nassie für die infos  

452 Postings, 8122 Tage atilaWerden wir heute den $ sehen?

 
  
    #2265
18.12.07 06:03
Sollten die sich wirklich geeinigt haben - sehen wir den $
Heute wird es bestimmt ein schöner dunkel-grüner Tag!
Nur manche haben halt den ICE gesehen - aber vergessen, ne Fahrkarte zukaufen und einzusteigen (ha,ha,ha)
Gruß atila

Ps.:  Tippe mal $1,1 - $1,4  -könnte bis 100% laufen  

3024 Postings, 7554 Tage MathouTurley in the news

 
  
    #2266
1
18.12.07 08:57

Turley in the news

                   

Posted by:                       usnr                       on                       December 18, 2007 12:49AM

                                                                                                         

Here are his thoughts on a few things, I did not go all the way back to see if some on allready got this or not...goo luck to all of us ....U.S.N. RETIRED

http://www.edn.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA6513534 

Putting a value on IP

By Jim Turley, Patriot Scientific -- Electronic Business, 12/17/2007

So you’ve decided to go into the intellectual property (IP) business. You’ve created a new chip design, software program, schematic, business model, one-click purchasing technology, or architectural design. You’re ready to license your brainstorm to a waiting market. The only hurdle remaining is deciding how much to charge.

How do you value intangible IP?

That’s a bit like asking, how cute is your kid? Every inventor believes that his “baby” is unique and priceless, so there’s a natural tendency to overestimate the value of one’s own inventions. Clearly something so precious and rare must be extraordinarily valuable. If it took years of difficult research and development to create, it must have enormous value to others. On the other hand, there are many cases where an engineer has undervalued his invention. Something that came easily to him, he reasons, can’t be worth much to others.
The problem lies with the engineering mindset and the concept of causality.

Let’s start with a hardware example. Your local hardware store buys nails in bulk at wholesale prices and sells them to you at a small profit. Likewise, Apple sells the iPhone for more than it costs to make and Dell sells computers for more than the cost of their components. Simple, right?

Yet Sony sells the PlayStation 3 for less than the cost of its components; Sony actually loses money on each sale. How can they stay in business? In Sony’s case, they make it up on the sale of videogames, which carry a royalty back to Sony. After you buy a certain number of PS3 games, Sony starts making money on you.

The point of all this is that there’s no causal relationship between cost and price. “Cost” is what you expended to create something; “price” is whatever the market will bear, not simply a percentage markup over the cost.

The same is true in the semiconductor business. The price of a chip isn’t necessarily related to its silicon cost. In fact, it’s usually not related. There was a brief period when the Intel ’387 coprocessor chip made more money for Intel than the U.S. Mint made printing dollar bills. It was literally more profitable than printing money.

Likewise, there’s no relationship whatsoever – none – between the amount of work you put into your IP and its value in the market. Just because you spend a lot of time developing something doesn’t mean it’s worth much to other people. An exact scale replica of the Eifel Tower built entirely out of toothpicks would take enormous effort to build yet have little value in the market.

Conversely, an idea that came to you in the blink of an eye can be worth millions. There’s no correlation between effort and value.

Value is in the eye of the beholder. What benefit does your IP bring to your customer? Look at it from their point of view. Does it save them time, avoid a costly alternative, provide compliance with a standard, or impress their customers? What can your customer charge his customers when this IP is included in his products?

Again, value isn’t determined by lines of code or number of logic gates. A short device driver or codec can be more valuable than a large one; a small circuit design is preferable to a bulky one. Size, like effort, doesn’t matter in IP valuation.

Microprocessors, coprocessors, and other software engines are especially tough to value because their real worth isn’t in the hardware. Processors and accelerators are keys to a software vault, and it’s the value of the software that really matters. Intel’s x86 chips are expensive because of the software they unlock, not because PC makers are excited about the chip design. The same goes for USB interfaces, MPEG-4 codecs, and other standards-based IP. Your customers want access to the standard and your IP is merely a means to an end, not an end in itself.

Finally, don’t underestimate the value of support. What most IP customers really want is a good feeling inside that they’ve licensed the right IP. They’re not really evaluating the technical merits of your IP (because they’re probably not qualified to do so). Instead, they’re evaluating your trustworthiness. Will you be around to support them when the inevitable questions or bugs crop up? Will you truly grant them access to the software or standard they want? IP is like insurance: The buyer wants to feel safe and secure before handing over the check. The best IP satisfies the licensee’s emotional, as well as technical needs.

About the author
Jim Turley is CEO of Patriot Scientific Corp., an IP licensing company headquartered in Carlsbad, Calif. Since August, 2001, Turley has managed his own technology consulting and analysis business, The Silicon Insider. Turley is the author of seven books on microprocessor chips, semiconductor intellectual property, computers, and silicon technology. He can be contacted at jturley@psct.com

 

 

8140 Postings, 7146 Tage checkerlarsenkann mal einer das noch ein bischen genauer

 
  
    #2267
18.12.07 09:16
analysieren?
die werden sich ja wohl nicht verglichen haben mit dem resultat das wir heute nur um 6% steigen.  

8140 Postings, 7146 Tage checkerlarsenjetzt 11% trotzdem noch nen bischen wenig...

 
  
    #2268
18.12.07 09:17

259 Postings, 7796 Tage esistjazzzumindest geht was...

 
  
    #2269
18.12.07 09:46
09:26:54 0,589 1.500
09:21:43 0,594 10.000
09:14:38 0,59 10.000
09:13:24 0,595 10.000
09:11:56 0,595 10.000
09:11:45 0,58 10.000
09:08:52 0,599 1.100
09:06:23 0,598 5.000
09:06:18 0,59 20.000
09:04:51 0,591 5.000
09:03:44 0,592 7.000
09:00:52 0,59 22.500
09:00:07 0,581 97.000  

249 Postings, 6840 Tage neureich13Einigung mit NEC

 
  
    #2270
18.12.07 09:48
http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666505#message:

Re: With prejudice and Without prejudice
Posted by: kiddtrader on December 17, 2007 06:43PM

"Interesting that our claims against NEC were dismissed with prejudice, meaning they can't be brought back, while NEC's counter claims were dismissed without prejudice.

Any legel eagles out there care to explain why that would be?  Seems like TPL/PTSC would want the same "with prejudice" protection that they gave NEC."

You know me, allready ran this by a patent attorney. His response:

We can't sue them for patent infringement regarding the same products in the future.  NEC can still bring forth its counterclaims...however it likely only had counterclaims seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement/ invalidity. I'm sure the settlement agreement addressed the issue of when NEC would have the right to bring a counterclaim.

Invalidity der Patente dürfte allerdings ein Traum bleiben - meine Meinung.  

249 Postings, 6840 Tage neureich13Noch ein interessanter Hinweis

 
  
    #2271
1
18.12.07 10:01
http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666592#message:

Entry of Order
can be used to discharge and settle any and all claims by a Plaintiff, and the sealed exhibits are the Stipulation, in my very humble opinion(please note that the "v" has been dropped: Technology Properties Limitied, Inc., v. Fujitsu Limited et al

das "v" - versus = gegen fehlt im Pacer!!

SEALED MOTION for Entry of Order by Technology Properties Limitied, Inc.,, Patriot Scientific Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.,, Matsushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd.,, Panasonic Corporation of North America,, JVC Americas Corporation,, Toshiba Corporation.,, Toshiba America, Inc.,, Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc.,, Toshiba America Consumer Products, LLC.,. )

I belive that a settlement has been concluded with ALL Defendants.


Daraus schließt "Posted by: milestone on December 17, 2007 07:48PM" den obigen Schluß:
Einigung mit allen.
Heute wird es spannend, wenn die US-Börsen öffnen.
 

8140 Postings, 7146 Tage checkerlarsenmüßte es nicht jetzt

 
  
    #2272
18.12.07 10:04
schon spannend sein neureich?
es muß doch auch in deutschland leute geben die das so einschätzen können was die amis dann  vormachen!
 

249 Postings, 6840 Tage neureich13Hier der Pacer zu 2271

 
  
    #2273
18.12.07 10:13
http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/666410#message

@checker - klar, aber sind nicht viele von uns schon zu früh eingestiegen in der Vergangenheit? Ne gewisse Vorsicht ist schon nicht schlecht bei der Sache, bei der man nicht richtig durchblicken kann (weil es um soviel Geld geht).  

8140 Postings, 7146 Tage checkerlarsenna zu früh bin ich nicht rein

 
  
    #2274
18.12.07 10:27
hab das teil nun seit fast 4 jahren.... bei 9 eurocent gekauft.. also kurz nach dem listing auch in deutschland.
was ich meine, ist wenn die sich nun mit ALLEN verglichen haben, muß doch irgendwer binnen kürzester zeit ausrechnen können was das teil nun an wert hat.  

249 Postings, 6840 Tage neureich13@ checker

 
  
    #2275
18.12.07 12:14
Meines Erachtens wird Geld erst fliessen, wenn die USPTO alle Einwände ausgeräumt hat - alle Patente hieb- und stichfest sind.
(Ich hab halt bei den run-ups mehrfach nachgekauft, bin aber insgesamt jetzt wieder im Grünen.)  

Seite: < 1 | ... | 88 | 89 | 90 |
| 92 | 93 | 94 | ... 343  >  
   Antwort einfügen - nach oben