Ford reminds world that it didn't "willfully" violate wiper patent

Discussion in 'Ford Industry News' started by Mav.bot, Sep 30, 2008.

  1. Mav.bot

    Mav.bot Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    17,332
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Filed under: Etc., Government/Legal, Chrysler, LLC., Ford
    [​IMG]
    Click to enlarge

    Engineer Bob Kearns had been granted a patent for a design of intermittent windshield wipers in 1967, two years before Ford introduced them in production. Unfortunately for Kearns, Ford had "developed" its own system rather than licensing Kearns' design. Needless to say, litigation ensued and it took until 1995 for the U.S. Supreme Court to finally rule against Ford and Chrysler and award Kearns $30 million. That story has now been turned into a major motion picture being released this week called Flash of Genius, and Ford wants you to know that the facts of the matter are much less dramatic than what the movie portrays.

    While reminding people that the facts have been dramatized, Ford also mentions that a jury ruled it did not "willfully" infringe on Kearns' patent. That's not to say Ford and Chrysler didn't infringe - juries ruled that they did. It just wasn't "willful." Did Kearns ultimately win? That's hard to say considering how his life turned out, but he was vindicated. On the other hand, many owners of older English cars would argue that Joseph Lucas invented the intermittent windshield wiper, although again not willfully.

    [Source: Ford]Continue reading Ford reminds world that it didn't "willfully" violate wiper patent


    Permalink | Email this | Comments

    More...
     
  2. signal20

    signal20 Paul VanSteen

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    97
    Location:
    Spring Hill, FL
    Vehicle:
    71 Maverick
    "While reminding people that the facts have been dramatized, Ford also mentions that a jury ruled it did not "willfully" infringe on Kearns' patent."

    Yaa, we riped him off, but not willfully.

    What does that mean?
     

Share This Page