4 ms·
> Licensing isn't a compliance matter. It literally is. I'm sorry that you can't English. I'm out.
by simondotau 3y ago
> Licensing isn't a compliance matter.
It literally is. I'm sorry that you can't English. I'm out.
- freejazz 3y agoIts not because there is no statutory licensing scheme that you would have to comply with... bizarre that you are saying I can't english. No one uses compliance that way. And if your point was that licensing is a compliance matter, you could have said so given the numerous times I asked what you meant by "compliance" in this context. Apparently you just mean "getting whatever is demanded". FRAND doesn't achieve that because it's not what the small-time inventor wants, it's what the big-time infringers want. It makes it trivial for them to infringe and they pay only what they would have had to had they obtained a license. It removes the willful punitive damages standard, which is already hard to achieve. That would mean you could put someone on notice that they are infringing, and they can say fuck off, with no recourse for them down the line. How is that pro small-time inventor???