[ADVERT]
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Nanoco Group Plc LSE:NANO London Ordinary Share GB00B01JLR99 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.15 -0.74% 20.20 19.80 20.60 20.00 19.80 20.00 240,359 16:35:12
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Technology Hardware & Equipment 3.9 -6.0 -1.8 - 62

Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

Showing 23976 to 23997 of 24200 messages
Chat Pages: 968  967  966  965  964  963  962  961  960  959  958  957  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
04/6/2021
07:14
NigWit - I am also not fond of posters that believe they are superior because they talk a good game and write big words....you fit the bill perfectly...and you are also very rude. Btw - can you explain to a thicko like me.. how you can write, "secret coverts" together and make sense? Have you been reading too much Jed Mercurio! lol The great pretender!
barkboo
03/6/2021
18:25
I’m sorry but I detest inauthentic posters who add nothing substantial but try to manipulate others with false narratives such as inventing secret covens of influential friends. Good or bad whatever I write comes from wanting to express the truth and not from trying to give false hope or inculcate fake doubts. I’m also impressed with Lobo’s analyses and already remarked upon them. However, having genuinely been involved with many IP cases and other litigations I will always urge caution. Yes, it’s looking positive and hopeful but it’s like a chess game where you can’t always determine as many moves ahead as the other side. We can’t be sure what the next move will be or how long it will take and that is why I think the market remains reluctant to invest more for now and is not responding to legal progress as much as it is to organic news.
nigwit
03/6/2021
08:45
Bagpuss - yes, I have seen the lobo posts, and they are eloquently written (I expect nothing less from an Irishman)...he has read the findings of the markman and come to a positive conclusion. He believes Samsung are playing a game they have zero skin in. Great to have another very positive view on the case - but my investment mind was made up long ago!
barkboo
03/6/2021
08:19
There is someone called lobo who does actually seem to know what they are talking about on the other thread. Worth reading their analysis of events
bagpuss67
03/6/2021
05:29
Well I'm glad nothing has changed in my absence. BB still winding up dimwit.
botbot1202
02/6/2021
23:49
Here we go again, grow up.
rp
01/6/2021
21:57
Barkboo. If I ever need a lawyer again it won’t be you. There’s an insightful analysis from Lobo on the other board.
nigwit
01/6/2021
17:53
supernumerary - the case I posted was still a patent dispute and settled by a nonpartisan arbitration. Being non judicial will sure speed the process...but the Nano v Samsung is already a longway down the line. The markman summary was in fact a judgement - the case will go to court! Samsung are littered with with theft and destruction: "9 Mar 2021 — Samsung has been ordered to pay $62.7m in damages by a Texas court for ... Fed Circuit hands Samsung new review of video coding patent" "Samsung Electronics Facing a Bunch of Lawsuits from Global 5 Mar 2021 — The latest suit was initiated by Solas OLED based in Dublin, Ireland. Solas OLED filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Display with the Western District Court in Texas"
barkboo
01/6/2021
16:40
BB - that's a completely different situation. Large tech companies often stockpile patents not because they need them but so that they can trade them with others who have patents they do need. This appears to have been the situation in the case you quote. These cross-licensing arrangements are very common - cheaper to do that than fight in court.
supernumerary
01/6/2021
16:14
Yes - and I thought I was on filter..... Do you know the difference between honesty and telling a porky?
barkboo
01/6/2021
15:25
Do you understand the distinction between a case that runs its whole course in court and one that reaches a voluntary settlement?
nigwit
01/6/2021
13:15
NigWit - I dont think these disputes/infringements last anywhere as long as you keep telling us...Samsung are always in the news for theft.. A two minute Google gave me another recent case below: "Samsung and Ericsson reach settlement Update: After a short but fierce global patent dispute Ericsson and Samsung have announced a multi-year agreement on global patent licenses, including patents relating to all cellular technologies and 5G. This settlement ends complaints filed by both companies before the United States International Trade Commission, as well as the ongoing lawsuits in several countries, including the fierce ASI dispute in China and the US over the end of 2020 and the beginning of 2021." I think you go back to Rumpole of the Bailey!
barkboo
01/6/2021
12:55
I don't think that's right. I'm a long term holder (five years) of a litigation funder called Burford Capital, who may be the funders for Nanoco v Samsung. From what I've seen the funders conduct extensive due diligence beforehand and then commit to see things through to the end if that's what the parties continue to want as the case develops. I've never heard of them walking part way through unless the parties settle first.
nigwit
01/6/2021
12:06
Surely if nanoco stood little chance of winning the company funding the case would pull the plug and not waste more money on it .But one can never predict a judge's decision !
haroldthegreat
01/6/2021
11:14
Let's hope he knocks heads together and gets them to agree on a compromise that puts an end to what will likely otherwise be years of arguments. ---- I think the guys on LSE may have reached a false conclusion this morning. It looks to me that Samsung got the PTAB review by promising they won't pursue the same grounds in the Texas proceedings as they will in the PTAB. They've applied to stay Texas so in their estimation they will get the stay, then the PTAB will rule, then Texas will rule on the remaining grounds and then everything will be appealed anyway.
nigwit
30/5/2021
17:20
David Folsom appointed as mediator. Good news that he is very experienced and also things moving forward
millwallfan
27/5/2021
15:10
hTTps://nysba.org/NYSBA/Sections/Dispute Resolution/Dispute Resolution PDFs/Benefits of ADR for IP.pdf (Drat! You'll just have to work it out for yourselves :) )
nigwit
27/5/2021
13:14
hxxps://nysba.org/NYSBA/Sections/Dispute%20Resolution/Dispute%20Resolution%20PDFs/Benefits%20of%20ADR%20for%20IP.pdf
piratepeter
27/5/2021
12:59
An attempt at mediation might be a requirement under the process so I don't think we should read much into it. If either party refused to attempt mediation they could find the costs of the proceedings awarded against them later, even if they win.
nigwit
27/5/2021
12:44
If you steal £250k from a BS and the punishment was £50k - would you keep doing it? We have an arbitrator/mediator that knows Samsung will! Looking forward to the medicine this time.
barkboo
27/5/2021
12:38
I believe David Folsom was involved some years ago in this patent infringement case: "Pioneer Wins Patent Infringement Suit against Samsung, "October 29, 2008, Tokyo, Japan- Pioneer Corporation announced today that a jury in the United States District Court in Eastern District of Texas has reached a verdict in favour of Pioneer Corporation in a patent infringement suit against Samsung" I also think there was a royalty cover awarded?? Samsung are bad news - and I dont think that is a secret.
barkboo
27/5/2021
08:14
All. The detail on mediation is some way into the stout interview but very clear he has the skills and knowledge which might be able to move the case forward.
millwallfan
Chat Pages: 968  967  966  965  964  963  962  961  960  959  958  957  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
NANO
Nanoco
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210917 22:12:48