I agree but how is it that both companies ended up on common grounds with Ford lagging behind the existing patent. My point is, when one considers a new development path, does one not first evaluate a patent and licensing issues before embarking on said technology?

My point being, were Ford aware of that technology before they began to execute their own approach. The release time of the respective hybrid cars seems immaterial (to me, anyhow)?

 

Sounds like a couple of things can be going on here. Toyota may be looking to reduce re-tooling costs at NUMMI by "sharing" hybrid technology. We'll give you a parallel hybrid if you pay for some of the cost to build it there. This also has the side benefit of tainting GMs hybrid technology as co-developed.

Toyota could also be hedging their bets in case the Volt gets that 100mpg EPA rating. If that occurs I'd imagine they would want to switch the Prius to series as quickly as possible. Having pre-existing technology agreements with GM would greatly expedite things.

 

Do you think it only took Ford less than 1 year to develop their hybrid system? Assume it takes 18 months. They have began develop, then Toyota comes out with something that is almost exactly the same as your idea. Do you throw away what you have done and start over?

The release dates are very crucial to explaining why this happened. One should evaluate patent and licensing issues before embarking. What if you check, nothing matches, you do development, before you are done, someone comes out with something very similar. What do you do at that point?

 

This article might add some perspective on the 'Toyota' system.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/05...t-appeal-case/

It could be that Ford also used the same technology available at the time but then were forced to pay Toyota for the right to use the system... this would make more sense to me.

 

Actually, I think this makes the case for me. Ford developed its own system. Much like Toyota did. Ford's system was close to Toyotas, so instead of facing legal action, Ford made some agreements with Toyota on the patent sharing. Ford wasn't forced to pay anyone anything.


Toyota lost this legal battle you referred to in your link. Why did they lose? Their system has components that are very close to components that someone else had developed and patented. Ford wanted to avoid this.

 

"Agreements with Toyota"...

So let me see if I've now got my facts straight... I gather your view/understanding is different to that reported by the media where "Ford licensed 21 patents" which Toyota own? I thought licensing implies 'payment' but you seem to imply there is no licensing at all... or at least that's how I understand your comment. Is that correct?

 

There was no payment, as they were not actually buying Toyotas technology. The only "payment" they got, was licensing some of Fords diesel patents.

Ford did this to cover their butts. Toyotas patents were so broad, they did not want to risk it.

The way it was explained, on another site, was rather simple. At the time that Ford developed their system, there was only one real way to sucessfully create these hybrids. Thus, Fords system was bound to end up being close to Toyotas, which, as Plague stated, was not out when Ford started. Thus, they could not find any patents on it. This same person has read the Toyota patents, and could not believe how broad they were. Basically, anyone who developed any kind of hybrid, in that timeframe, would potentially be able to be sued.

Thus, the finality of this is, Ford bought nothing from Toyota.............. The trade of patent licensing just assured that Toyota would not sue them for patent infringement.

 

Ahh yes, that makes sense to me now. Thanks.

Patenting is not an area I am remotely familiar with but if the wording was very broad, it makes you wonder how 21 patents were exchanged... particularly as there was only really one way to develop the system.

Lawyer's jargon.