Quote:
Originally Posted by quikM2
At the end of the day its ppf, its a film product.. pretty basic stuff and I don't think it's fair 3m can hit xpel just because they are doing well and have the best product. I'm not familiar at all with patent law but to me that doesn't seem to be justice to hold a product or small company back from a great idea just because its similar to the giant that is 3m.
|
That's not how it works. It's about protecting intellectual property rights. If others (regardless whether big or small entities) want to benefit from your patented technology (which possibly required quite some R&D investment), they require your permission (mostly through license agreements stipulating the payment of royalties).
Patent lawsuits are often very technical and complex, with the patent holder fiercely fighting to get confirmed what he believes to be his right(s), while his rival battles back to get confirmed that the patent holder's claims are ill-founded. Actually, you could say that it's a fight about (threatened) monopoly, competition and (market share) money. Losing the lawsuit can be painful for each party if it's related to their core business. Sometimes, in the end, patent lawsuits are settled out of court.
I don't know anything about the merits of the 3M / XPEL lawsuit, so can by no means make sound statements about it.