You raise an interesting legal/contractual question. As all have heard me spout, a contract (license) is only valid based on agreed INTENT. If our licenses with chip manufacturers included language simto LG's language in the licenses, then it seems to me the agreed intent can't be met. Thus those licenses (e.g., Intel and AMD) may be possible to be "revisited" since it is possible that those licenses are no longer valid.
Do they contain such language? Based on the warnings to sub-tier users by higher-tier manufacturers (like Fujitsu, I believe, where they state that users of their product should coordinate with TPL for a license), it would certainly seem so.
It would appear that we are once again in agreement. I'd like to see a per chip fee, based on selling price, of all microprocessors produced henceforth.
The beauty of the Quanta ruling is that ALL maufacturers that have yet to license have now been placed on notice that they are liable for ALL chips produced since they received the infringement notification from PTSC/TPL.
Validation by the USPTO will, I humbly suggest, have a more positive effect on licensing than previously expected.
Be well
