Judge favors Nano-Proprietary in Canon licensing quandary

We all had high hopes that SED TVs wouldn't become another case of "what could have been," but unfortunately for everyone, things aren't looking too bright right about now. Last we heard, Canon was reportedly all set to buy out Toshiba's display stake, theoretically squashing Nano-Proprietary's claim that licensing agreements would be breached if Tosh remained in the mix, but it seems that things just can't be so easy. A federal judge has now ruled that Canon "violated its agreement with Texas-based Nano-Proprietary by forming a joint television venture with Toshiba," and while "damages still need to be determined," it's fairly clear who will come out the victor in this scenario. Still, this just appears to be yet another snag in the development of new nanotube sets, and while we should all just be used to it by now, that glimmer of hope that Canon and Nano-Proprietary "could now develop a new licensing agreement" is still (currently) alive.

[almostinfamous @ Feb 23rd 2007 10:25AM]

why would any one, let alone a suspicious mind like a corporate lawyer, ever go into any dealings with a company called "nano PROPRIETARY" and then not expect to get sued at the earliest is beyond me.

[david @ Feb 23rd 2007 10:39AM]

I have no idea whether or not the IP / Patents in question have other applications that the licensee (Canon) and illegal licensee (Toshiba) could take advantage of and use for other purposes . . . but this very much looks like Nano Propriety is cutting off their nose to spite their face. I mean I understand the LEGAL desire to not give away your IP, but the commercial implications are that in preventing someone (i.e., Toshiba) from being able to participate in the JV with Canon, and then taking Canon to court, there's a high likelihood that no commercially viable product will EVER come of the technology that Nano Proprietary is so intent on protecting. What that says to me is either: a) Nano Propriety has either far too much faith in their IP or no understanding of how much catching up SED has to do, or b) Nano Proprietary doesn't believe their IP was ever going to result in a product and consequently is trying to recover some of their R&D costs by suing the pants off of Canon. Either way, SED looks like yet another promising technology that is going to be stranded by the side of the road while other, less-promising technologies flourish because their IP is either "open" or the commercial entities that own the IP in question understand the commercialization process.

[Chris @ Feb 23rd 2007 11:36AM]

mostly likely a bit of A and B there. Of course, maybe the contract isn't a "per unit" deal and thus it doesn't matter if SED's are every sold, the licensing is still paid for.

Next step should be Canon suing NP for preventing them from bringing the sets to market and making money on their licensing investment.

Propriety sucks, and this a textbook case as to why. No one wins.

[SOCOMRAIDER @ Feb 23rd 2007 4:32PM]

Great post.

[David @ Feb 23rd 2007 1:52PM]

If you license your technology with a specific company, then that company turns around and shares your IP with another company without your permission, how would you react? It doesn't matter how much catching up SED has to do. You don't let others walk all over you. NP needs to be in control of their IP.

[Karl Viklund @ Feb 23rd 2007 2:15PM]

Nano-Proprietary needs to be eliminated.

[Parasite_Evil @ Feb 24th 2007 1:14AM]

God damn Texans. This is why this state should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Talk about stagnating the progress of the human race.

[AnonCoward @ Feb 24th 2007 3:16AM]

When SED was first announced I decided to put off buying a plasma or LCD. Oh well. Another lost sale. Once I buy my new set I won't be buying another one for at least another five years.

[george @ Feb 24th 2007 4:01PM]

You guys are right. Any time a gigantic MNC steals technology from a small local (might I add US based) company, that smaller company should just fold in the interest of furthering the release of new technology...

Get real. Canon/Toshiba were in breach for the past year and a half. They are getting what they had coming. The parties will likely re-negotiate after any appeals are taken and, if by that point SED technology is not obsolete, they might strike a new deal.

In the meantime, there are deals to be had on excellent LCD tv's. Prices are falling rapidly (check out a 37in Olevia LCD for sub $600, for example) and will continue to do so as component manufacturing costs reach economies of scale.

[helixdpr @ Feb 26th 2007 12:55PM]

George is right on. The emotions of those who express distain for NPI have no idea what they're talking about. Have you been following this case since it was filed in April, 2005? Somehow, I doubt it. Do you know that Zvi Yaniv stands as a giant in the nanoelectronics industry? Didn't you know that without his genius, there would not be such a thing as LCD display technology today?

Nano-Proprietary sold Canon the entire SED portfolio (including ALL FUTURE RIGHTS to any related IP) for a paultry $5.5 million in 1999 in a NON-exlusive AGREEMENT. Canon had full access--forever. But, that wasn't enough for these greedy little bums. Canon wanted to shut out NPI from selling its own IP to anyone else. That's what this is all about. Toshiba and SED, Inc. were supposed to conclude licensing contracts with NNPP, but Canon claimed pass along rights and materially breached the contract. How dare you denegrate Texas and the Federal District Court in something you have no knowledge about whatsoever. As a result of this ruling, now Taiwanese Samsung has expressed an interest in purchasing SED technology from NPI.

NNPP is about the best pure-play nano stock you will ever find. You don't like the name? Get used to it. You're going to be hearing that name for a long time to come. Like Microsoft.


helix.

[rm @ Feb 28th 2007 11:33AM]

Really without Zvi Yaniv there would be no LCD displays? Odd that wikipedia has no mention of him. If he was such a giant in LCD displays you would expect him to be mentioned as one of the major contributors in the history section.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_display