Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 321 posts

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#301

Post by darkfirefly »

wyager wrote: post #121
whimsicalism wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think society today is insufficiently aggressive and vengeful. Sure, the society with one of the largest per capita prison populations in the world is insufficiently vengeful.

The government is not the same thing as society. The government is more than willing to burn money pursuing people who break its rules, to pretty significant effect, but individuals and private companies presently lack the requisite sense of pride/aggression/honor/whatever. One obvious source of this problem is that n-tit-for-tat behavior in humans is moderated by testosterone levels, which have been declining precip…

> problem is that n-tit-for-tat behavior in humans is moderated by testosterone levels, which have been declining precipitously

sorry, what?

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#303

Post by Dylan16807 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #254
gpm wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will, intentional infringement is worse than accidental infringement, but both are illegal. (not a lawyer...)

Sure, but I meant that it won't materially affect the finding of whether infringement occurred, willful or accidental.

That wasn't the question. It was whether hard work is being taken for free.

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#304

Post by N00bN00b »

denton-scratch wrote: post #264
N00bN00b wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's a discourteous and lazy way of dumping a romantic interest. Language isn't fixed, the meaning of words, especially "new" words (and ghosting is a new verb) changes over time. That was the original meaning, but it's now applied to all relationships. >Ghosting is by no means limited to long-term romantic relationships. Informal dating relationships, friendships, even work relationships may end with a form of ghos…

I was unclear (in the interest of brevity:-) For clarity, I didn't mean that ghosting was only to do with dumping partners. I suppose I was suggesting that that's the canonical example.

Ah alright. I thought you didn't know. Have a good one.

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#305

Post by zaphirplane »

Andrew_Russell wrote: post #44

I am an IP litigator, and I have dealt with patent trolls repeatedly. I have taken these kinds of cases pro bono in the past for small companies (including through the EFF attorney referral list, https://www.eff.org/pages/legal-assistance ), and I know that others have as well. There are definitely low-cost and pro bono (free) options out there for very small businesses. The EFF attorney referral list is a good place…

I am interested in knowing why you do this for free (I’m assuming from context)

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#306

Post by coldpie »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #232
coldpie wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is taking anything for free? Do you think people go read through the patent database to get product ideas? If I create a product and bring it to market without any knowledge of your patent, why should I pay you just because you invented it earlier and then sat on it?

It's not _just_ because you invented it earlier, you also have to disclose it in a way that makes it workable. The disclosure is supposed to drive innovation and use of innovations; that's the patent deal, the monopoly is "paid" for with disclosure. Aside, in the UK there's compulsory licensing (UKPA Section 48x to prevent people from inventing stuff and refusing to license it (at reasonable terms), too.

I would be surprised if this happened even once in the history of the patent system, and I feel confident stating it has never happened in the past 50 years. Patents do not drive innovation, they restrict it and erect barriers to entry.

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#307

Post by hvis »

gpm wrote: post #267
hvis wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But you probably have a point that if patents are legitimate than an otherwise ethical patent troll would also be legitimate I'm not sure it's possible to be an "ethical" patent troll. It is a structure explicitly chosen to minimize any collateral in case their patents are thrown out in court, claims are invalidated, and they have to pay to for the counterpart's expenses (and which point the company is simply disso…

Step 1 for being an ethical patent troll would be having enough assets that you aren't just a judgement proof vehicle for lawsuits, but there's no reason that isn't possible. A diverse portfolio of legitimate patents, a healthy bank account, and voila. There are a variety of reasons why forming a "real company" that produces products might not be practical. For example you might be in a field where the startup costs…

I'm not sure it's feasible to meaningfully regulate/legislate what a "healthy bank account" is for such a company. There is always risk that, when the going gets tough, the company will transfer funds (e.g. by purchasing some "consultation services" from a tightly-controlled shell company), or that it will get into too many lawsuits, losses on which will still exceed the available balance.

> There are a variety of reasons why forming a "real company" that produces products might not be practical. For example you might be in a field where the startup costs for a competitive company is in the billions (silicon manufacturing), or that is a natural monopoly already monopolized by one or two big companies (operating systems). Your competitors also have patents on things that you would need to be competitive and for whatever reason you aren't willing to license them.

But what are you doing with those patents, then? As much as we both consider them to be a bad idea, patents are supposed to be a vehicle to promote tangible advancements in the field, to encourage development and manufacturing. If you don't produce anything but just stop anybody else from doing that, or just collect rent by granting out permissions, you are not using patents "correctly".

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#308

Post by gpm »

hvis wrote: post #307
gpm wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step 1 for being an ethical patent troll would be having enough assets that you aren't just a judgement proof vehicle for lawsuits, but there's no reason that isn't possible. A diverse portfolio of legitimate patents, a healthy bank account, and voila. There are a variety of reasons why forming a "real company" that produces products might not be practical. For example you might be in a field where the startup costs…

I'm not sure it's feasible to meaningfully regulate/legislate what a "healthy bank account" is for such a company. There is always risk that, when the going gets tough, the company will transfer funds (e.g. by purchasing some "consultation services" from a tightly-controlled shell company), or that it will get into too many lawsuits, losses on which will still exceed the available balance. > There are a variety of re…

> I'm not sure it's feasible to meaningfully regulate/legislate what a "healthy bank account" is for such a company.

I'm not sure it is either, the law is a blunt tool and it's not always possible to legislate things like "be ethical".

One potential way to do legislate this is to require that plaintiffs place funds in escrow pending the outcome of the case, to pay for the other sides fees if they lose. Occasionally courts will already order this under current law. I'm not going to generally advocate for that as a good idea though, I think it probably has a lot of side effects and I haven't put enough thought into it to be sure it is a good idea.

> But what are you doing with those patents, then? As much as we both consider them to be a bad idea, patents are supposed to be a vehicle to promote tangible advancements in the field, to encourage development and manufacturing. If you don't produce anything but just stop anybody else from doing that, or just collect rent by granting out permissions, you are not using patents "correctly".

Theoretically, it was the act of inventing that occurred prior to the award of the patent that the patent is supposed to be rewarding. The reward is precisely the ability to extract rent from people who use the invention (whether by making it and selling devices at a premium, or licensing the patent).

You see this mechanism actually function in pharmaceuticals for instance, because patents are so valuable there are companies that pour resources into inventing new drugs that they can patent. (I have other issues with patents in this industry, I wrote about them elsewhere in this comment thread, but the reward mechanism really does motivate useful work here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27587034)

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#309

Post by hvis »

gpm wrote: post #308
hvis wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's feasible to meaningfully regulate/legislate what a "healthy bank account" is for such a company. There is always risk that, when the going gets tough, the company will transfer funds (e.g. by purchasing some "consultation services" from a tightly-controlled shell company), or that it will get into too many lawsuits, losses on which will still exceed the available balance. > There are a variety of re…

> I'm not sure it's feasible to meaningfully regulate/legislate what a "healthy bank account" is for such a company. I'm not sure it is either, the law is a blunt tool and it's not always possible to legislate things like "be ethical". One potential way to do legislate this is to require that plaintiffs place funds in escrow pending the outcome of the case, to pay for the other sides fees if they lose. Occasionally c…

> One potential way to do legislate this is to require that plaintiffs place funds in escrow pending the outcome of the case, to pay for the other sides fees if they lose. Occasionally courts will already order this under current law. I'm not going to generally advocate for that as a good idea though, I think it probably has a lot of side effects and I haven't put enough thought into it to be sure it is a good idea.

That's an interesting direction, but how does the collateral compare to the average lawsuit's costs? What happens if the suit drags on, exceeding the collateral, do the parties just agree to disagree and drop it?

I could also be a small company, on the defending side, which is the frequent case in patent trolling scenarios. I shouldn't be barred from defending myself in court if I don't have the ability to post the collateral up front (if I'm convinced my case is strong, at least).

On the flip side, a small IP owner should still be able to sue a giant company that is violating their patents/copyrights/etc. Even if the said company has a lot of money and is liable to create huge attorney bills. But I suppose if the escrow for plaintiffs becomes more common, it's a small price to pay for the benefit of the whole ecosystem.

> You see this mechanism actually function in pharmaceuticals for instance, because patents are so valuable there are companies that pour resources into inventing new drugs that they can patent. (I have other issues with patents in this industry, I wrote about them elsewhere in this comment thread, but the reward mechanism really does motivate useful work here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27587034)

Good points on the pharma industry.

But okay, let's agree that there are pharma companies (research laboratories, etc) that don't ever do the end production themselves. Perhaps that's even a good state of affairs (of which I'm less certain).

Still, those companies are "real", and they have financing and budgets for stuff other than the patent lawsuits. They have to do the said research and put quite a lot of money in it (which is what makes those patents valuable and arguably a benefit to society as a whole), and that distinguishes them from an average patent troll.

Re: Ask HN: I was hit with a patent troll lawsuit, how do I deal with it?

#310

Post by arendtio »

bitwize wrote: post #181
kian wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure it's still considered rude.

You're obviously not a woman who has had to deal with potentially threatening people in your love life. Among women ghosting is 100% a legitimate way to refuse a second/third/etc. date. In business, companies routinely ghost candidates they're not interested in because of the hassle and risk in interacting with candidates who are clearly no-hires. You don't owe anyone with whom you do not have a solid established rel…

I think there is a fine line between 'rude' and 'appropriate' in this case.

- Simply stopping to respond to requests without signaling in any way, that you are not interested in continuing the interaction is rude (aka ghosting).

- Signaling even just once that you would not like to continue the interaction (as clearly and polite as possible) and ignoring the other side from that point on is appropriate.

Even though you might not 'owe anyone' anything, humans typically have socially accepted behavior patterns. So the argument is less about what you must do and more about what the majority of people around you consider good style. However, these things might differ between cultures and social circles.

Post reply on HN