Many people seem very concerned about collecting for past infringement. I recall clearly, years ago, TPL stating that, when in license negotiations, they "forgive" past infringement and seek license for future infringement. So, based on this, IMO past infringement is not a concern when it comes to licensing.

Where it does become a concern, IMO, is when we try to enter formal litigation, because in order to bring suit to be accepted by the court, the plaintiff must demonstrate that they have been "damaged", with a "d" at the end. However, I do not believe this is a real concern in any case. As Milestone stated earleir today, as long as one solitary infringed claim within the patent remains intact, we can demonstrate having been "damaged" monetarily.

Some have suggested that with potential less capacity to collect licensing fees for past infingement due to amendment of the patent, we may not be able to demand higher dollars for future licenses. What they seem to forget is that with an amended patent that has been blessed by the PTO, our negotiating position is much stronger, by orders of magnitude IMO. Stronger position=more money.

Think about it. From when the PTO saga ends forward, what infringer is going to want to go the litigation route, where their only remaining avenue of escape is to try and prove their products never infringed. Good luck with THAT.

Does this shine a light on how sweet our position is about to be IMO? How there may be "waves" of licensees? How the rewards will be much greater?

Understand why I re-invested?

JMHOs,

SGE