London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
So basically it sounds like enforcing IP can be an absolute nightmare . Having said surely CPXs experts know the score and the "rules of engagement" and they are employed to make judgment calls as to whether any given case is worth pursuing. So my take on it is that cases should only be pursued if there a better than 50/50 chance of winning and then from a company that is known to be financially stable. In CPXs case these judgments have to be precise as royalties are not a major revenue channel . Judgement calls have to be made everyday, its making the right ones is the difficult bit. I recall discussing the possibility of counterfeits many moons ago only to be laughed at. I still reckon picking a fight with Musk will sooner or later change this company drastically . Lets hope its for the better.
Problem with relatively straightforward items like capacitors is that the world and its dog can copy, albeit illegal, and then keep swapping business ownership addum finitum to keep the legal bloodhounds at bay. To be effective you have to find the factory and see if you can close it down in a matter of days. Thats a nightmare by itself in some Far East countries let alone wondering how many other factories are dotted around faking these. Only solution is to sway away from the component manufacturer and identify the end product Western Democratic importers and for a crippling import tax to be added. That can only happen quickly where CPX can show that the component is a fake which would require some feature in the capacitor which is quickly evident via an independent laboratory.
So OS, last time I asked you question of whether you defend the IP or not you said you would, previously you said you wouldn't so what is it now? Would you defend the IP, obviously incurring legal costs or wouldn't you? Or would you only do it if you would win and get paid? Need a wodge of hindsight for that. You have lots of advice for AK, now put yourself in his shoes, what would you do and fudge isn't an answer.
Sorry Nitram I have already proved what I own albeit to JH (myself?) of course . While the judgement well may be good for our general IP "well being" its money in the bank that counts and to date this case has only cost us money . As I say the real money game is now being orchestrated by Mr Musk. I sincerely hope it all comes good but somehow it never does with CPX
So CPX are awarded $5m from the Ioxus IP infringement case and the feeling here is that they wont see any of it. XS Power bought them out with full knowledge of the case and likely outcome, XS Power bought the value from the sales that infringed the IP. So what happens next? CAP-XX take XS Power to court, we wouldobviously win. To avoid any damages XS Power sell out to another company I've just set up, ACME IP Dodgers Inc. That model can't be legal. It would make the US powerless in terms of IP protection IMO. So XS either pay something and do a license deal or stop selling those products which would have to move to either Direct sales or to a CAP-XX licensee. Surely?
Excellent news! Only a shame CAP-XX probably won't see any of it but the important thing is the IP stacks up.
Open, the judge hasn't simply awarded the case to CAP-XX for the fun of it, "Oh Ioxus aren't defending, let me stick my finger in the air and see which way the wind's blowing.....",
Nor did he award the CDE case to CAP-XX for the fun if it. Nor did TDK / AVX / Murata all sign license agreements for the fun of it. This is all because CAP-XX patents are exceptionally strong.
CAP-XX have now won 2 of the 3 cases in the US all under the same 2 patents. Maxwell will delay, that's just part of the process, but it can't stop the inevitable conclusion that they also are infringing.
It also sends a strong message to the other big companies out there (e.g. Panasonic) that CAP-XX patents can't be defeated.
The question is was this judgement made because Ioxus gave up (and failed to defend) possibly because it couldn't afford it or was it because the CPX case was overwhelming ? Come what may I cannot see Musk being so submissive. He has the clout to either cause us a lot of problems or simply string it out . In this uncertain world how many businesses will have the resources to carry on with endless litigation?
Who knows what is happening in the background. Communication has and is a disaster from cap xx. That is the problem. Great news on the court case and should help towards a resolution with other cases. Fingers crossed.
Has any one contacted Speed or AK? If so, what is the response?
Given that Ioxus has sold its assets but not its debts I assume they will simply go bankrupt. What needs to happen now is to quickly register a claim against XP who continue to produce Ioxus supercaps. All this seems so easy for infringers to get away with. But not even a mention from CPX. The real question is what is Tusks next move.
ORDER granting85 Motion for Default Judgment in favor of Cap-XX, Ltd. against Ioxus, Inc. The Court: a. finding that Defendant is liable for infringing the patents-in-suit; b. awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages in the amount of $1,237,717.37 based on a reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. § 284; c. awarding Plaintiff enhanced damages in the amount of $3,713,152.11 based on the trebling of Plaintiffs actual damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 for Defendant's willful infringement; d. finding that this case is "exceptional" and award Plaintiff its attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285; e. granting Plaintiff leave to submit a motion for attorney fees under Rule 54(d)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure within fourteen (14) days of the Court's Entry of Default Judgment. (CASE CLOSED) Signed by Judge Colm F. Connolly on 8/5/2020. (nmf)