I just want to know one thing: what exactly is just rewards for one's vision? An enforceable patent? A million dollars? If your vision is so good, why did someone else execute on it first? See, this line of thinking reminds me of the Winklevii.
This was interesting: "Although i4i does have a business besides enforcing its patents, it is not competing with Microsoft for word processing software."
I remember that case well, and at no time did anyone (I don't think) consider i4i a patent troll.
Agree that unethical patent litigators are the new ambulance chaser (hello? blog post title just wrote itself...) and I made reference to that at some point, regarding the lawyers that moved from the mesothelioma "dust docket" to patent infringement litigation.
The problem with fee shifting is that it won't matter. You can't get blood out of a turnip. If a patent troll loses a suit, all they have to do is hide their money in another shell company and all of a sudden, there's no money to pay the fee.
The problem of litigation cost recovery is a real one, and I agree with this guy:
"This problem (which applies whether you're suing or being sued) is one of the big reasons why the justice system is actually pretty sparing in terms of being able to deliver actual justice."
It does seem that the golden rule applies: He who has the gold makes the rules. But straight up shifting to a "loser pays" isn't going to help, in my opinion, because in the case of patent trolls they'll cry bankruptcy and you'll never see a dime.
Well, Bill and Nathan (of IV fame) are in bed together so MSFT isn't likely to sue anyone out of oblivion, lol! Well, not anyone big anyway.
IV is panicking because they can't pay back their investors. They're going to sue and sue and sue until they get their returns up. They know the game well.
Just sayin',
IPTT Disclaimer: Bill and Nathan aren't literally in bed together. That I know of.
"It's an important piece that chronicles the University of California's shift away from the pursuit and sharing of knowledge for the benefit of all humanity, to the monopolization of ideas and maximization of profits for a few privileged investors."
They're just doing what is profitable, and patent trolls have proven for over 10 years now that their business model is profitable...and growing.
"This is another good one. We've written a few times about the practice of some trolls to try to even keep their demands secret, such that many who receive demand letters don't know that they're one of a group -- and a group that might team up to fight back against bogus threats. Basically, it sounds like this might help lead to a "Chilling Effects" website for troll demands. That sounds quite useful"
Working on that now...http://www.thatpatenttool.com
Not all states allow for declaratory judgment hearings, I think is the issue.
It's so sad when companies capitulate to this crap. SalesForce needs to have a convo with NewEgg, Rackspace, and Fark and figure out how to beat the trolls like they did.
I'll never be convinced that the government is the right place to solve this problem, beyond cleaning up the USPTO so stupid patents don't get granted in the first place. But it is encouraging I suppose that at least the noise level is high enough now to convince people that patent trolling is a real and very serious issue facing American businesses!
Besides, Cornyn is a hometown boy for me so you gotta side with a Texan if at all possible!
Thank God Mr. Bowman has that dog to keep him company in his time of loss. Like I said, playuhs gonna play: http://iptrolltracker2.wordpress.com/2013/03/06/play-uhs-gonna-play/
I would dearly love to read the truth about trolls, but got tripped up by the incorrect use of the word "allusive" in the first paragraph of your first link. I think the word you wanted was "elusive"?
I wouldn't argue that some large entities are part of the problem, but I would argue that point with better grammar.
Just sayin',
IPTT
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Steph Kennedy.
Re: Fix the law.
"Intellectual Ventures' shareholders disagree"
Do they though? Are they making money now off of their "investment" in patent trolling? They weren't not too long ago...
Just sayin',
Steph
Re: Re: About trolls
How would you fix the law? Institute "use it or lose it" for patents? That's one thing I wish #patentreform were about...
Cheers,
Steph
Re:
What's so funny is, I rick roll every.single.link to IV. Every one. And people still click.
Y'all are slow learners!!
=)
Cheers,
Steph
Re: The Truth About Patent Trolls
I just want to know one thing: what exactly is just rewards for one's vision? An enforceable patent? A million dollars? If your vision is so good, why did someone else execute on it first? See, this line of thinking reminds me of the Winklevii.
This was interesting: "Although i4i does have a business besides enforcing its patents, it is not competing with Microsoft for word processing software."
I remember that case well, and at no time did anyone (I don't think) consider i4i a patent troll.
Agree that unethical patent litigators are the new ambulance chaser (hello? blog post title just wrote itself...) and I made reference to that at some point, regarding the lawyers that moved from the mesothelioma "dust docket" to patent infringement litigation.
Interesting read.
Just sayin',
Steph
It won't matter...
The problem with fee shifting is that it won't matter. You can't get blood out of a turnip. If a patent troll loses a suit, all they have to do is hide their money in another shell company and all of a sudden, there's no money to pay the fee.
The problem of litigation cost recovery is a real one, and I agree with this guy:
"This problem (which applies whether you're suing or being sued) is one of the big reasons why the justice system is actually pretty sparing in terms of being able to deliver actual justice."
It does seem that the golden rule applies: He who has the gold makes the rules. But straight up shifting to a "loser pays" isn't going to help, in my opinion, because in the case of patent trolls they'll cry bankruptcy and you'll never see a dime.
Just sayin',
IPTT
It's like they need a Markman Hearing for determining how to define "metadata". Or "stealing", even.
Just sayin'.
Here's how Intellectual Ventures would respond to the FTC...
http://iptrolltracker2.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/ftc-asks-intellectual-ventures-answers-hint-probably-a-satirical-post/
OK...how they would *probably* respond.
Just sayin',
IPTT
Re:
Well, Bill and Nathan (of IV fame) are in bed together so MSFT isn't likely to sue anyone out of oblivion, lol! Well, not anyone big anyway.
IV is panicking because they can't pay back their investors. They're going to sue and sue and sue until they get their returns up. They know the game well.
Just sayin',
IPTT
Disclaimer: Bill and Nathan aren't literally in bed together. That I know of.
This would make a great new chapter in an updated version of Approaching Infinity...
Just sayin',
IPTT
Coming to you from the "And, and, and, and...THENhe called me a baby and took my lunch money *pout*" department.
Good on TMSoft for not paying the troll toll! http://iptrolltracker2.wordpress.com/2013/07/06/tmsoft-says-no-thankyouverymuch-to-the-troll-toll/
...and why wouldn't they?
"It's an important piece that chronicles the University of California's shift away from the pursuit and sharing of knowledge for the benefit of all humanity, to the monopolization of ideas and maximization of profits for a few privileged investors."
They're just doing what is profitable, and patent trolls have proven for over 10 years now that their business model is profitable...and growing.
Just sayin',
IPTT
"This is another good one. We've written a few times about the practice of some trolls to try to even keep their demands secret, such that many who receive demand letters don't know that they're one of a group -- and a group that might team up to fight back against bogus threats. Basically, it sounds like this might help lead to a "Chilling Effects" website for troll demands. That sounds quite useful"
Working on that now...http://www.thatpatenttool.com
DJ
Not all states allow for declaratory judgment hearings, I think is the issue.
It's so sad when companies capitulate to this crap. SalesForce needs to have a convo with NewEgg, Rackspace, and Fark and figure out how to beat the trolls like they did.
Just sayin',
IPTT
I hate to play this card, but...
...where are these people's Mothers? Did they not learn as children that you don't return one bad deed with another?
Good God above, what have we come to?
Just sayin',
IPTT (and Mom, whose kids would be in heap big trouble for retaliation)
From the "just-what-we-need,-more-laws" department
I'll never be convinced that the government is the right place to solve this problem, beyond cleaning up the USPTO so stupid patents don't get granted in the first place. But it is encouraging I suppose that at least the noise level is high enough now to convince people that patent trolling is a real and very serious issue facing American businesses!
Besides, Cornyn is a hometown boy for me so you gotta side with a Texan if at all possible!
Just sayin',
IPTT
Thank God Mr. Bowman has that dog to keep him company in his time of loss. Like I said, playuhs gonna play: http://iptrolltracker2.wordpress.com/2013/03/06/play-uhs-gonna-play/
Re: more dissembling by Masnick
I would dearly love to read the truth about trolls, but got tripped up by the incorrect use of the word "allusive" in the first paragraph of your first link. I think the word you wanted was "elusive"?
I wouldn't argue that some large entities are part of the problem, but I would argue that point with better grammar.
Just sayin',
IPTT