Ronald J Riley 's Techdirt Comments
Latest Comments (786)
-
On the post: Another 'Free' Business Model Experiment
-
On the post: Red Hat And The Power Of Infinite Goods
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 29 Mar, 2008 @ 12:23pmStealing to Support Loss Leader Business Model
Michael Masnick and his side kick Timothy Lee made the following comments:
“Red Hat And The Power Of Infinite Goods (Earnings, IPOs, and the like)
by Timothy Lee from the economics-of-free dept on Friday, March 28th, 2008 @ 5:39PM”
“The New York Times has a great write-up of the continued rapid growth of Red Hat. Despite the looming recession, Red Hat is predicting 30 percent revenue growth in the coming year, to more than half a billion dollars. For a few years, Mike has been talking about how to make money while giving away infinite goods, and Red Hat could probably be the poster child for his argument. Despite the fact that virtually all of its "products" are available for free on the Internet, Red Hat is still convincing companies to pay it hundreds of millions of dollars.”
And
“Another 'Free' Business Model Experiment (Culture)
by Michael Masnick from the they're-all-over dept on Friday, March 28th, 2008 @ 3:16PM”
“When we discuss the basic economics having to do with infinite goods, sometimes the debates in the comments accuse me of promoting one "business model" over all others. The truth is quite different. The economics at work are fundamental. Price gets driven to marginal cost.”
In these comments they freely acknowledge the point I have been making for some time concerning the loss leader business model where someone gives away something in order to drive sales of their services or of other products.
Now there is nothing wrong with this business model as long as they are giving away their own property. But most of these businesses are founded on giving away other’s property without their permission. In other words their business model is like that of a chop shop which installs stolen auto parts and charges to install those parts. They are still crooks, and all the rationalization in the world does not change the unvarnished truth of this.
These crooks will rationalize that they are really Robin Hood reincarnated. Yet when caught no one buys their claims except their fellow thieves. The same is true in the free software community. To the degree that their business model is based on giving away property which is not theirs to give they are simply another bunch of thieves who reinforce each other’s incredibly wrong thinking.
The leaders of the anti-software patent movement frequently make their living by supplying services, authoring books, etc. Many claim their work is inventive but this is questionable and in the absence of having their work judged via the patent process they simply cannot make a credible case that they have done anything more than copy other's inventions by coding a solution in a marginally different way. Even if they are inventing they are not teaching others the invention and therefore have chosen to keep their work essentially secret, much as guilds used to jealously guard the secrets of their trade to exclude others from practicing the inventions. In many ways they are treating their knowledge as a trade secret.
As long as there has been software, engineers have been making tradeoffs between implementing an invention in hardware or software or a combination of the two. As electronics have shrunk and processors have become more powerful an ever greater number of inventions are best implemented via software.
Denying inventors’ protection via patents is sure to lead to the same problems which society had when guilds kept knowledge secret.
One of the beauties of software based invention is that it has low capital requirements. Anyone who is willing to work hard and has a great invention can prosper. A software patent can be a great equalizer allowing a lone inventor to challenge a big vested interest and to win epic battles.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Rep. Berman: Those Who Don't Like The PRO IP Bill Just Want To Steal Stuff
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 29 Mar, 2008 @ 11:53amMike's Wounded Ego :)
“Ronald, I highly doubt that any educated person reading our conversations would believe you over me.”
Michael Masnick, I am surrounded by not just educated but brilliant people. I think that is a group is so far above your and your minion’s level that you are not even capable of comprehending the degree of difference.
I assure you that they do believe me over you :) There is no question that you are a master of the written word. But there is a huge difference between the public relations spin which you are so good at and the truth. There is a difference between your thought processes and an inventor’s analytical outlook.
“Now, we all know that Rep. Howard Berman, who represents a district right next door to Hollywood is in favor of strengthening intellectual property laws.” Yet Rep. Howard Berman is trying to weaken patent protections. Either you are right or you are wrong and like usual you are incredibly wrong.
Michael Masnick, you are always so smug and now you have lost that smugness, at least briefly. I am willing to bet that there are a bunch of people who are having a very good laugh over you losing your temper in this exchange. You are always welcome to take your best shot. I am confident that it will never be good enough :)
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST -
On the post: Rep. Berman: Those Who Don't Like The PRO IP Bill Just Want To Steal Stuff
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 29 Mar, 2008 @ 05:50amFixing my typo
"He has worked hard to make holding patents about a hundred times more expensive than it is now and to limit recovery for infringement to one to one tenth what it is now."
Should have read:
He has worked hard to make holding patents about a hundred times more expensive than it is now and to limit recovery for infringement to one to one tenth OF ONE PERCENT what it is now. -
On the post: Rep. Berman: Those Who Don't Like The PRO IP Bill Just Want To Steal Stuff
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 29 Mar, 2008 @ 04:58amGetti.ng your facts right
“Now, we all know that Rep. Howard Berman, who represents a district right next door to Hollywood is in favor of strengthening intellectual property laws.”
Michael Masnick, if you are going to act like a reporter you really need to get your facts straight. Berman favors strengthening copyright because he is feeding at the trough of copyright interests. At the same time Rep. Howard Berman is doing his best to weaken and turn the patent system into a king’s sport. He has worked hard to make holding patents about a hundred times more expensive than it is now and to limit recovery for infringement to one to one tenth what it is now.
Dare I say that Rep. Howard Berman is suffering from a split personality? The connection between Rep. Howard Berman’s diametrically opposed points of view is big business money.
And then you go on to say “This, ladies and gentleman, is the guy who's in charge of determining our intellectual property laws.”
Michael Masnick, this is another clear error of fact (Which goes to my opinion that you are pretty ignorant about intellectual property issues.) Sorry, but Rep. Howard Berman is not in charge of determining our intellectual property laws. He is the chairman and one of many House members on the IP subcommittee. You also have people serving similar functions of the Senate side and in the end it takes a majority vote of both the House and Senate.
Michael Masnick says “(which, of course, isn't possible -- you can infringe, but not steal it)”, which is yet another error of fact. Intellectual property is clearly defined in the Constitution as a property right. If someone has met the criteria defined in law and granted intellectual property rights taking that property is theft, stealing, etc.
I do not approve of theft of IP because it is the backbone of our whole economic system. But I also do not approve of the copyright industry’s constant attempts to restrict their customer’s rights to fair use of property which they have purchased. In fact I would agree that the industry’s conduct has been outrageous.
In my opinion Michael Masnick and Rep. Howard Berman are a lot alike, I think it is probable that when it comes to patents that both are serving the same masters.
Once again Mike I want to thank you for giving me use of this forum because it has brought many new members to PIAUSA.org. Both you and Cisco’s and their Troll Tracker have inadvertently helped PIAUSA.org torpedo patent deform. We do this in part in recognition of the second most prolific inventor in the history of America, Jerry Lemelson who was also viciously maligned by groups of patent pirating companies throughout the nineteen-nineties :)
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Wait, Weren't Big Newspapers Needed For Credibility?
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2008 @ 07:46amWhy I drop in.
"He's a self professed 'expert' on Intellectual Property, and likes to post his credentials to give the illusion of authority. In other words, he's angrydude with a better vocabulary."
I think that most inventors are sick of opportunists stealing their creations, and yes it is flat out theft because it is a constitutionally defined property right. And I am a recognized expert about intellectual property issues as they relate to inventor-entrepreneurs. Frankly the opinions of those who associate with the Piracy Coalition or otherwise stooge for them carry no weight in the inventor community.
“With all your lobbying activity I'm surprise you have time to be an "inventor".”
Actually I consider the patent deform issue so important that I have put my inventing career on hold. I fund my activism with royalties from inventions I have already commercialized. I have already sunk in excess of a million dollars in the current patent deform fight.
Also, unlike most of the people on this forum I am willing to sign my name to what I have to say. It seems many of you do not have the gumption to stand behind what you say, and frankly that makes many even less credible than Mike.
Mike most certainly scours high and low to find corporate shills who agree with his agenda. But I have yet to see any who are recognized experts.
I keep speaking to the issue of the Coalition for Patent fairness, aka. the Piracy Coalition because I think the companies involved in that group are very poor corporate citizens. I also think, as evidenced by the Cisco fiasco that Piracy Coalition members are using stealth tactics to get many people to carry their water who would not do so if they knew who was really behind all this troll crap.
Last, once again I must point out that I am fully aware that Mike with never be swayed by reason or the real facts. As I have said before I suspect that he has a very good reason$ for backing bad players and their agenda.
Therefore, the only reason for me to drop in here is to catch the attention of other people who share my views. You would be amazed at how Mike is pissing off inventor-entrepreneurs. His comments are making an impression and driving those people to join our efforts to kill patent deform.
One more point, in that troll tracker made it much easier for me to locate people who are being victimized by Piracy Coalition members. It is my opinion that Cisco and those who stooge for them are scum, but even scum can be used for good purposes.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Jury Has No Problem With Rambus Patent Tricks; But Let's Wait For The Appeal
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2008 @ 03:03amRambus-techDIRT head where the daylight does not s
I believe that it is Micron and a group of like minded patent pirating companies operating as the Coalition for Patent Fairness, aka the “Piracy Coalition” who are bad players. Rambus and the people who invested in the company are victims of these unethical companies.
Piracy Coalition members either produce no inventions or small incremental inventions. Some Piracy Coalition members started as true innovators but have lost the ability while others have been parasites on inventors from their inception.
I routinely deal with inventors who produce significant inventions. I want to make it very clear that Rambus produced important brilliant breakthrough inventions and that they were immediately attacked by vested interests who had inferior technology. It is my opinion that Micron has been a parasite from its inception and that Micron’s conduct is unacceptable in civilized society.
Rather a company is past its prime and unable to produce significant inventions or as I believe is the case with Micron was never able to produce significant inventions they inevitably resort to filing massive numbers of insignificant incremental improvements in an attempt to compensate for their inability to produce. They are about quantity over quality.
What they are good at is questionable political activity and creative (with the facts) public relations campaigns. This is in my opinion the case with all the members of the Piracy Coalition.
They leave no political trick left unturned, including lobbying the FTC, the FDA, the USPTO, etc. to carry their water.
These issues are important to every citizen of the US. The reason is that in the absence of intellectual property products and service tend to become commodity items with razor thin profit margins. Such businesses cannot afford to pay well.
Conversely, with intellectual property margins are much higher and the businesses based on patent property rights can pay living wages.
If the Piracy Coalition has their way with patent deform it will be the end of America being a land of opportunity.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Wait, Weren't Big Newspapers Needed For Credibility?
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2008 @ 02:49amTechDirt Like Checkout Rags
Mike, the vast majority of what you have to say about intellectual property is based on very low journalistic standards. It is nothing more than an endless stream of uninformed opinion based on your personal convictions (?) that the parasites of our society should be able to take other's IP without compensation. It is telling that your sympathies like with those who pirate other’s patent property rights.
One example being your comments to others who don't like your IP agenda that it is strange that they show up at the same time I do. Apparently it has not occurred to you that when you post using keywords which inventors are monitoring via search engine alerts that that may bring inventors with similar interests to the appropriately named techDIRT.
I have received solicitations from people who blog for a price. Basically they are stealth PR people who work for hire. I have no interest in hiring them but it has occurred to me that you may be one of these people. Most certainly the Coalition for Patent fairness & PIRACY, aka. the Piracy Coalition is spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to eviscerate the patent system. I have no doubt that they have a team of people working blogs. I cannot help but wonder whose payroll you are on?
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Limelight Level 3 Gears Up For Patent Nuclear War
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 21 Mar, 2008 @ 03:52amYep, Clearly Kingston has promoter the progress
Mike,
Your reasoning process, or should I say lack of such is fascinating.
Clearly Akamai did research and furthermore they taught all of society through the patent process. That advanced the collective arts. Then a competitor apparently stole the patented technology. Generally at that point the patent property owner tries to reason with the thief and when that fails they sue their ass.
There is a simple solution to these problems, start following the golden rule: Thou shalt not steal or covet other's patent properties.
You remind me of the troll tracker. Maybe you should offer a few words of encouragement to him and his handlers at Cisco.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Digg And Others Sued For Infringing Infamous Computer Solitaire Patent
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 19 Mar, 2008 @ 08:09amMike: Uninformed Drivel
Mike, I see you are still spewing uninformed drivel about patent cases.
The only way to get at the truth in these cases is via the court. None of us can know rather a patent is silly or brilliant until the fat lady sings.
What we do know is that patent pirating transnational corporations routinely steal other's intellectual property. We also know that you virtually always characterize such lawsuits, the patents, and the inventors behind the patents as evil doers.
Yet patent pirates are routinely being handed their heads by the courts. Which means that after all the arguments were heard that the courts are finding that the inventions are important, that they are legitimate, and that the teams you are cheering for are found to be thieves.
How about you go back and do a review of how many cases you called right? I bet you could count them on one hand.
The problem with you and most of your fan club is that you don’t know how to read and interpret what a patent says. You jump to ridiculous conclusions based on a profound ignorance of what the patents actually cover.
One last point, Cisco and their Troll Tracker are going to be buying personal lube in case qualities. Boy, they have really screwed up royal! Backing patent piracy can be a rather painful process :)
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Law Firm Uses Copyright Claim To Say You Can't View Its Website's HTML Source
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 28 Nov, 2007 @ 08:50amJust a reminder that he and his client received much more than they bargained for after sending some of their inane threats to www.InventorEd.org and also a blogger. See www.CyberTrialLawyer-SUCKS.com and www.InventorEd.org/caution/inventor-link/ for an example of how I think that threats of SLAPP actions should be dealt with. Personally I think that leaving all those sucks domains available says volumes about Dozier's competence.
Just do a Google search for Bull Dozier Law, and you will see that his new SUCKS web presence rates higher than his own web site.
By the way Mike, I am glad to see that you finally are on the right side of an issue. And as you can see, even though I think you a dead wrong about IP issues in general I have been easy on you. The Dozier Bull.... website demonstrates this in spades.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Patent Reform Battle Descending Into Farce
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 13 Oct, 2007 @ 01:37pmShilling for different clients?
"How can I possibly be shilling for these companies if so much of what I write apparently goes against their interests?"
Maybe you have different clients? -
On the post: Patent Reform Battle Descending Into Farce
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 12 Oct, 2007 @ 08:31amDr. Damadian has a place in history.
Mike Masnick said "Please, let's be accurate. Dr. Damadian is the *disputed* and highly controversial inventor of MRI -- and many would point out that his contributions weren't the important part of what made MRI successful."
What drivel, shortly after any inventor produces something of value shysters come out trying to rationalize taking some or all the money and glory. It is a fact that the people you refer to are back biting academics who couldn't have offered improvements if not for Dr. Damadian's producing the original invention. You just do not seem to comprehend that someone has to produce the invention before ANYONE can move on commercialization.
Riley said "Tell me Mike, have you ever had an original thought?" to which Mike replies "Yeah, I've built a successful business and a successful website on totally unoriginal thoughts." and goes on to say "Just as Dr. Damian has done, I have helped create jobs. I employ a staff of people and our service helps many experts around the world make a living.
Mike, where do you get off comparing your business and your work on behalf of large companies with the work of an inventor like Dr. Damadian. That is absurd!
Dr. Damadian has increased peoples life spans, alleviated suffering, and actually created new wealth. In the end ALL your business does is siphon off existing wealth. Dr. Damadian's inventions will be the subject of historical note, and while you are no doubt making a handsome living doing the bidding of big business, when your life is done you will be quickly forgotten. That is reality, so wake up.
Mike Masnick says: "Ronald, I'm not sure why you continue to attack me personally " and "I will note, once again, that you didn't refute a *single* point in my post (which is unfortunately typical of your posts). If you want to debate me on the points, I'd appreciate it. If you want to just insult me and bring up tangential, totally unrelated points, I'd imagine you'd be saving both of us a lot of time if you just did it elsewhere."
Almost every inventor who produces something of value faces a multitude of lying, cheating, and thieving companies or individuals who rationalize that they should be able to profit from the inventor's work without compensating the inventor. If you are as hot shot as you like tell us you know that there are far more parasites than there are companies who actually produce something unique.
Patent pirating companies abuse inventors over many years, often spanning a decade or more. They steal billions of dollars from inventors, and to top it all off they conduct public relations campaigns painting those they have abused as bad players. So why are you surprised that inventors find the drivel you write about these topics personally offensive and respond accordingly?
The reason that you draw the ire of inventors is that you constantly rationalize why parasites should have free reign. That is probably because you are yourself one of those parasites, or even worse just a stooge for parasitic clients.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.PatentPolicy.org - RRiley at PatentPolicy.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Patent Reform Battle Descending Into Farce
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 11 Oct, 2007 @ 05:11pmAd is by MRI Inventor
Once again Mike Masnick is shooting from the hip and removing all doubt. Tell me Mike, are you clueless as to who wrote that ad?
It was none other than the inventor of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Dr. Raymond Damadian. He is the father of the whole MRI industry and the founder of FONAR. Dr. Damadian is an inductee of the Inventors Hall of Fame and a recipient of many other significant awards.
The founders saw fit to explicitly define patent and copyrights as a property right!
You do write well Mike, which makes it a terrible shame that you were shorted in terms of analytical capabilities much as happens with idiot savants.
Tell me Mike, have you ever had an original thought? I doubt it. I think that you and your business are another parasitic operation, one kissing up to other parasites like the members of the Coalition for Patent fairness and PIRACY. I think it is probable that your client list reads like a Who's Who of the patent piracy coalition.
Returning to the issue of Dr. Damadian. His life work has resulted in a stream of important inventions which have saved countless lives and created jobs and tax base. He employees many hundreds of people directly and the industry he created employs hundreds of thousands of people. Meanwhile, what has your miserable existence done for the collective good of society?
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Unions Make Ridiculous Arguments Against Patent Reform
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 29 Aug, 2007 @ 05:58pmUsing this forum in the best manner.
Random Thoughts, you hit my approach dead on. Mike simply spews out Microsoft, Cisco, Micron, Dell and the rest of the Piracy Coalition's propaganda. There is no point in trying to carry on a conversation with him.
Also, he reveals a profound ignorance of what is really happening in the patent reform fight, which tells me he is a pretty low level player. He is intellectually dishonest in his replies.
Collectively all this tells me that it is not worth spending much time on him because he will continue to advocate for the Piracy Coalition's agenda no matter how compelling counter arguments are.
So I am not here to convince Mike about anything. The reason I drop in is to take advantage of the fact that his outrageous comments draw potential inventor supporters. So by spending a small amount of time on the sites which are stooging for the Piracy Coalition I attract new solders to our side.
Thank you Mike of helping me identify and recruit kindred spirits :)
By the way, the Piracy Coalition and their elected stooges have been running around this week begging legislators to tell them what changes they can make to save the bill. I smell the blood of our arch enemies!
Piracy Coalition members and their shills are also running around telling legislators that union opposition is soft. They are about to be handed their heads for that one. I cannot think of anything more they could have done to help drive even more labor support for inventors. These guys have tons of money, most of which they are stealing from real inventors, but they surely are not the brightest bulbs in the pack.
There you go Mike, some real honest to goodness intelligence about what is going on in the trenches.
One more thing Mike, your article which started this discussion had a distinct whine about the turn of events. I promise you that when you come to understand the full scope of what is happening that both the pitch and the volume will greatly increase.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Unions Make Ridiculous Arguments Against Patent Reform
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 28 Aug, 2007 @ 05:14amMike said:
"Yes, they should support the rights of American citizens. I never said otherwise. The problem is that Riley's policies don't support those rights. Instead, they support the weakening of American innovation by strangling the ingredients of growth: ideas."
No, what they do is give the inventor time to enjoy the fruits of their creativity and in so doing allow the inventor to recover the investment they made in making the invention.
Here is reality for you Mike. The Patent Pirates are scrambling to get their bill on the floor next week because they know that time is on the side of those who actually invent. What they don't quite understand yet is that patent deform is essentially dead but we will continue to see the Coalition for Patent fairness & PIRACY and their stooges thrash around for the next month or so. It is dead because it was never about actual reform or about addressing the real problem which is exactly what unions are experts about.
The problem is classic, in that there are not enough examiners and the management of the USPTO is grossly incompetent. The solution is to hire another 10,000 or so examiners and to do a management house cleaning at the USPTO. We are addressing both those problems.
The second part of the solution is to give every patent pirating company their day in court. That problem is also being addressed. Of course those companies are being handed their heads for their disreputable conduct, and that is why they are spending hundreds of millions of dollars in an attempt to mitigate the consequences of their taking liberties with other's property.
I am going to leave the rest up to your limited imagination. Keep your eye on media coverage of this issue. I promise you that you will have much more to whine about in the coming weeks.
Sorry, but I have to return to toiling away in obscurity to promote truth and justice. I hope that you all enjoy the upcoming show as much as I expect to enjoy it.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Unions Make Ridiculous Arguments Against Patent Reform
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 27 Aug, 2007 @ 05:36pmMike, like usual you have the facts wrong.
It is important to note that unions have entered the fray on patent reform for a multitude of their own reasons. There are many very intelligent and committed people in organized labor. They are perfectly capable of judging the merits of the respective arguments for themselves. I very much doubt that any of the people from organized labor I have had the pleasure of meeting could be bought or mislead into backing the agenda of disreputable interests. Frankly, if I was on the side of patent pirates I would be afraid to show my face in public.
I most certainly was not surprised to see Mike paint the unions as being "blinded". It is this kind of arrogance by the patent pirating crowd which has led to broad spread disrespect of the Coalition for Patent fairness & PIRACY and their agenda being discredited in Congress.
I do want to profusely thank organized labor for their insight related to patent pirating companies massive propaganda campaign. A warm relationship is blossoming and the Professional Inventors Alliance is looking forward to working with organized labor to both preserve and create jobs so that America and other developed countries can preserve a decent standard of living in the face of globalization.
In regards to the economic issues surrounding patent piracy I believe that I can safely assume that you are personally ill qualified to comment on the issues. For that reason I suggest that you should consult someone like Pat Choate who is in fact an economist and an expert in the economic impact of patent deform. Also, the patent reform fight has gone on for may years and we were fortunate to have the support of three Nobel in economics recipients.
If someone is going to spout off about the impact of patent reform perhaps it would be wise to consult someone who is actually an expert. Professor Irving Kayton is the leading patent law expert in the US. While others are strutting around claiming expertise in the hope of being put on the dole by one of the infamous patent pirates, fully 75% of practicing patent practioners have taken patent law classes created by Professor Kayton.
It is unfortunate that so many people in the software community rationalize that recoding another's invention in a marginally different way somehow makes them an inventor. And even if they by some miracle invented something their failure to teach the invention clearly leaves them with no rights. So what we have are a bunch of parasitic people and companies who are doing their best to socialize other's property. We and they know that they are at best second rate, and majority of them are far below that!
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Patent Trolls Foster Innovation?
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 06 Mar, 2007 @ 03:56am"from the excuse-me? dept" "So, despite your claim to know more than I ever will (can you be any more condescending?)"
Mike,
1) There is no excuse for your position which amounts to a "taking" of an inventor's property rights.
2) I am responding to your condescending attitude which flies in the face of the constitution, law, and all precedent. What you are suggesting is much more radical than the Kelo decision which has caused a huge backlash. It is a taking not for the good of the public but rather for the good of smooth operators who would hide behind government to line their own pockets.
I hope for your sake that you are never caught infringing someone's' patent, for your public comments on these issues would surely hang you for willful infringement, leading to enhanced damages of up to three fold!
"Our service is incredibly innovative", if you say so. You sound like the software crowd who claims to be innovative while in fact most just code someone else's invention in a marginally different way.
There is a huge difference between marketing hype and substance. It is clear that you are a very effective communicator, a trait which relatively few inventors have. But in the absence of having your inventiveness validated by a patent I have to conclude that you have much in common with companies like RIM, and that your strength is more in PR than in substance.
It has been my experience that PR types are very good at spin and that they think of that as being innovative, but we both know that while such may be profitable for them it is not good for society at large. But being spin masters they do try to convince all of us that their profits are due to their innovativeness.
Parasites prosper even as they kill their host. Organized inventors are simply helping to eradicate parasitic behavior. I think that Mikes stand on intellectual property is driven by self interest and an inability to produce any significant invention.
"Again with this myth. You keep setting up this false dichotomy between those poor independent inventors and the big bad companies -- and yet you know that's not true." But it is true, and if you knew the history of inventors you would know this. Start by reading about Farnsworth, then read The Laser by Nick Taylor, and Pat Choate's Agents of Influence and Hot Property. You should also read about Bob Kearns, for it was his thirty year patent battle which catalyzed contingency litigation and later the emergence of patent enforcement companies.
"Ronald is actually arguing the opposite. He claims it's the big companies that are arguing against such patents because they want to "steal" ideas for independent inventors. That's what I was trying to point out."
Mike, the political landscape is much more complex. There is a group of washed up tech companies, insurance, and banking interests who are doing their best to outright kill the patent system. There is a separate group of large much older companies who have an agenda for patent reform which would enhance their rights while undermining the rights of small companies, and then there is a group of companies large and small which want to maintain the status quo (which I and other inventors are aligned). I find it interesting that after professing to know so much about these issues that you clearly do not understand the dynamics of the politics.
The patent system works well, it is the patent office which is the problem. This is a complex issue which I do not have time to go into in depth. But reduced to it's essence the USPTO needs to train at least 3000 examiners a year to deal with the backlog and workload. They now have about 5000 but need 10,000 just to tread water. They are training about 1200 a year and losing 500. They have a 700,000 and growing backlog. We need to ramp the examining core up to about 15,000 to fix the staffing issues and wipe out the backlog. There are also serious management problems which is at the heart of the loss of 500 examiners a year. The office has bureaucratic tunnel vision.
"My point to Ronald was that he's wrong in thinking that it's the small developers who are protected by patents." Small entities who have been protected are many, Dr Damadian (MRI), Bob Kearns (intermittent windshield control), Gordon Gould (laser-30 year battle), Mike Levine (many inventions - a decade and counting of litigation), Thomas Campana (who died waiting for justice), Paul Heckel and many more.
"misanthropic humanist" says: "Look at the open source free software movement for an example of why this isn't the case."
Not a valid comparison. First off is that software is low capital and labor intensive, ideal for a solo inventor while many other areas require a huge capital investment.
Abolishing patents by PT "Going the route of open publication is nothing but good for humankind. Add to the body of knowledge for the benefit of others. That's not to say the publication isn't rewarding. It is like a scientist making a discovery, writing about it, publishing for peer review, and becoming famous for their discovery. Like the scientist, the inventor's name could become immortalized in history. The potential bragging rights alone is attractive for some people, haha."
Those who are on the public dole like scientists and academics can afford to publish but those who must pay our own way must extract tribute for our inventions from the marketplace. Academics tend to put out material which needs considerable work to introduce to the market. Such work can represent a very large capital investment, and no company will make that investment if others can swoop in and take the market leaving them holding the bag for the developmental costs. The end result is that many public domain ideas or products will not be commercialized. So publishing, and the lack of any way to protect an investment often kills any chance of the invention being deployed.
I am pleased to see that a few readers are starting to identify a few of the problems which inventors face. The point of the patent system is to convince inventors to publish the invention instead of keeping it a secret. In exchange for doing so they are given a twenty year monopoly from the date of filing. At least half of the twenty years is eaten up by the patent process and then the quest for capital to create the product and enter the market. Few upstart startup companies would have the chance to grow and mature in the absence of patent protection. What would happen is that the existing companies would only get bigger and more stagnate if they did not have those upstarts nipping at their heals with enforceable patents in hand.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Patent Trolls Foster Innovation?
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 05 Mar, 2007 @ 09:21amEthical Disability
"Mike is an idiot by angry dude on Mar 5th, 2007 @ 6:39am
Mike, AS i TOLD YOU BEFORE, YOU ARE A MORON"
Angry Dude,
You most certainly have a reason to be angry but I suggest that your philosophy should be to get even as opposed to investing lots of energy in anger. A cold calculated rage might be a better approach.
Different people have different abilities. For example it is very common for inventors to suffer from ADD, dyslexia, and poor written communication skills. They aren't stupid, they just have difficulties with language.
I do not think that Mike is a moron, in fact he is probably quite bright and has made a calculated decision to offer a service to those whose business model is to pirate others' inventions. The reason is probably fairly simple, in that this is where the easy money is at. We also see the same happen with many academics.
I work closely with law enforcement on the invention promotion fraud issue www.InventorEd.org/caution/. In several instances I have had conversations with these people about what drives criminals. The consensus is that a fairly large chunk of the population (perhaps 20%) lacks the innate ability to understand ethics and morals. In fact, if you look at the development of state, church and law you will find that much of this was driven by the need to set down rules for those who lack the ability to understand right from wrong.
Because intellectual property is an intangible asset people like Mike have difficulty understanding right from wrong.
It is a combination of self interest and a disability which usually drives most patent pirates, and the rest of the group is suffering from the "Little person Syndrome".
What the inventor community has been doing for the last fifteen years is gently steering policy and the availability of both contingency litigators and patent enforcement houses. The idea is to make patent piracy so expensive that the consequences strike fear in the hearts of those who lack ethics or compassion. We have reached the stage where they fear us. We need to keep the pressure up until they finally figure out that stealing IP is a zero sum game.
We are working on the next stage of enforcement at this time. I guarantee that patent pirates are about to get an enhanced educational opportunity. Just remember that while they have rather thick skulls that they can and will learn. For a few it will be the hard way, and then the rest will fall into line.
Last point, no inventor will be able to convince people like we see rationalizing theft of our property on this forum that what they do is wrong. It may be worthwhile to occasionally drop in and remind them that they are wrong but short of actually catching them with their sticky fingers on someone's property and adjusting their attitude over the indiscretion they are pretty much hopeless. A better use of your time is to join with those of us who are organized. So stop by the web sites listed below and learn what you can do both to advance your inventions and to protect the patent system from patent pirates.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. -
On the post: Patent Trolls Foster Innovation?
Ronald J Riley ( profile ), 05 Mar, 2007 @ 03:35amArguments built on false assumptions (Complete)
Riley said: "The costs are only high for those who chose to steal.
Mike said: "You say that with a straight face. Yet, RIM had to pay over half a BILLION dollars for an OBVIOUS idea of doing email wirelessly, an idea that was obvious enough for them to develop entirely independently of the patents held by NTP, who simply held those patents and waited until someone did the obvious thing and made email wireless."
Mike, all your arguments are built on false assumptions and a profound ignorance of the facts.
First is the fact that society has a contract that in exchange for teaching an invention as opposed to keeping it a secret the inventor gets a twenty year monopoly. Inventors have held up their side of the bargain and spent considerable time and money to obtain a patent and you argue that those inventors should now be stiffed so that people like you can profit from them.
Second, I know far more about RIM infringement than you ever will and it is a fact that RIM infringed the patents. It is also a fact that RIM was caught red handed committing fraud on the court. It is a fact that RIM's conduct was so poor as shown in the record that none of the courts all the way to the Supreme Court had any sympathy for them. It is also a fact that RIM is a member of the Coalition for Patent Piracy (they say piracy =fairness:) and that RIM and the Coalition have conducted a ten million dollar PR campaign to try and convince all that piracy is really ok. It is a fact that your arguments closely parallel those of the piracy coalition. Reasonable people cannot help but wonder how this came to be.
As to your claim that RIM independently invented, I doubt that this was the case. Also, RIM has a rather clear history of taking liberties with other's inventions.
Here is another tidbit for you. RIM could have licensed the Campana invention for perhaps 5 million early on. Running up to the trial they could have settled for perhaps 10-15 million. A year before the injunction they could have settled for 450 million but they blew the deal with outrageous terms. It cost them 612 million. There is only one lesson to be learned from the RIM case, and that is that egos of entitlement minded management can lead to the company having to open their own personal lube manufacturing operation and they better be sure they are not stepping on anyone's intellectual property in that endeavor either.
"Sorry. The costs are quite high not for those who "steal" but those who actually innovated successfully and brought a product to market."
Mike, your whole argument is based on an assumption that inventors should have to compete with parasitic business owners for the profits of their inventions, but that is not the law. Surely you should realize that if you build your business on a rotten foundation like this assumption that it could be catastrophic. I think it is that realization that is the root of your resentment of inventors. I think that your skills are conducive to commercializing but that you probably lack the inventive spark. The answer to this is to partner with an inventor, the sum total of such a partnership could be greater than the parts. I think that your current business is one of sucking up to tech companies whose business model is based on patent piracy.
Yes, it is possible to make a very good living as a parasite, but wouldn't it be much more satisfying and productive to make that living as an innovator, or if you personally just cannot innovate at least use your skills in conjunction with those who can.
Sorry, but I now have to get back to the work of handing the Coalition for Patent Piracy another stunning defeat. This easier than it was in the nineteen-nineties because the coalition's arrogance has alienated most industry segments.
Ronald J. Riley,
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.
Chop Shop Loss Leader Business Model
“Red Hat And The Power Of Infinite Goods (Earnings, IPOs, and the like)
by Timothy Lee from the economics-of-free dept on Friday, March 28th, 2008 @ 5:39PM”
“The New York Times has a great write-up of the continued rapid growth of Red Hat. Despite the looming recession, Red Hat is predicting 30 percent revenue growth in the coming year, to more than half a billion dollars. For a few years, Mike has been talking about how to make money while giving away infinite goods, and Red Hat could probably be the poster child for his argument. Despite the fact that virtually all of its "products" are available for free on the Internet, Red Hat is still convincing companies to pay it hundreds of millions of dollars.”
And
“Another 'Free' Business Model Experiment (Culture)
by Michael Masnick from the they're-all-over dept on Friday, March 28th, 2008 @ 3:16PM”
“When we discuss the basic economics having to do with infinite goods, sometimes the debates in the comments accuse me of promoting one "business model" over all others. The truth is quite different. The economics at work are fundamental. Price gets driven to marginal cost.”
In these comments they freely acknowledge the point I have been making for some time concerning the loss leader business model where someone gives away something in order to drive sales of their services or of other products.
Now there is nothing wrong with this business model as long as they are giving away their own property. But most of these businesses are founded on giving away other’s property without their permission. In other words their business model is like that of a chop shop which installs stolen auto parts and charges to install those parts. They are still crooks, and all the rationalization in the world does not change the unvarnished truth of this.
These crooks will rationalize that they are really Robin Hood reincarnated. Yet when caught no one buys their claims except their fellow thieves. The same is true in the free software community. To the degree that their business model is based on giving away property which is not theirs to give they are simply another bunch of thieves who reinforce each other’s incredibly wrong thinking.
The leaders of the anti-software patent movement frequently make their living by supplying services, authoring books, etc. Many claim their work is inventive but this is questionable and in the absence of having their work judged via the patent process they simply cannot make a credible case that they have done anything more than copy other's inventions by coding a solution in a marginally different way. Even if they are inventing they are not teaching others the invention and therefore have chosen to keep their work essentially secret, much as guilds used to jealously guard the secrets of their trade to exclude others from practicing the inventions. In many ways they are treating their knowledge as a trade secret.
As long as there has been software, engineers have been making tradeoffs between implementing an invention in hardware or software or a combination of the two. As electronics have shrunk and processors have become more powerful an ever greater number of inventions are best implemented via software.
Denying inventors’ protection via patents is sure to lead to the same problems which society had when guilds kept knowledge secret.
One of the beauties of software based invention is that it has low capital requirements. Anyone who is willing to work hard and has a great invention can prosper. A software patent can be a great equalizer allowing a lone inventor to challenge a big vested interest and to win epic battles.
Ronald J. Riley,
Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.