Subject: Re: IC's patent-pending technology
From: Rob Cameron <robc@international-characters.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:34:43 -0700

Stephen,

Thanks for your comments.   One small correction, though.

On September 27, 2006 03:30 am, stephen@xemacs.org wrote:
> 
> They still can do that, given the covenant.  They have to avoid
> combinations with proprietary and unpublished products, including what
> we would call "mere aggregation" (and probably licenses with required-
> patent-licensing language in them).  This cuts down a lot of the
> business models commonly used, of course, but not to zero.
> 

We are only interested in (and only entitled to be interested in) 
combinations that actually infringe patent claims.    I think 
"mere aggregations" would be excluded by definition.