Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#151

Post by clavalle » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:25 PM UTC

thegasman wrote: post #128

clavalle wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. Having money equips someone to at least be able to put up a fight to reach a conclusion but that is not the heart of the issue. Whether you have money or not the real problem is the threat of loss due to the /process/ as opposed the merits and likely result of the case. That is the problem that needs to be solved. I'm not saying I know how to remove the expense of the process out of the equation but th…

Many of the issues raised by your comment are the result of civil procedural rules. These rules are not intentionally designed to postpone rulings on the merits, and instead were built on historical understandings of how a dispute should be fairly addressed: 1) communicate problem to adverse party 2) adverse party responds 3) fact-finding 4) written arguments aimed at resolution 5) trial by judge/peers (if necessary)…

Not speed but cost of which time is definitely a factor.

Getting to the merits is the point but the point is often lost in the game of the process. True statement?

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#152

Post by clavalle » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:27 PM UTC

pdabbadabba wrote: post #130

sheepleherd wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| We do not have equal access to our judicial system in the United States. If you have money, you have the power... Your POV that money distorts and helps determine winners, while seeming so prima facie obvious, does not come close to getting to the real problem. I know this because I have money and I've spent well over a million dollars on attorneys in the last decade and I got very little in the way of ... not just…

I'm one of those hated attorneys. And, in my experience, while there are issues that sometimes may seem to outsiders like pointless minutae that keep people from getting at the real issues, the rules of civil procedure (especially at the federal level) are designed to do exactly what you want: to facilitate getting to the core of the issue as fast as possible (of course, if the core of the issue is a factual question…

> one of the first things the rules would have you do is to file a motion to dismiss arguing exactly those points.

Great! How much would getting to that point typically cost a defendant in the case of a fairly obvious bullshit patent?

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#153

Post by tim333 » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:29 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #129

curiousgal wrote: post #27

I'm no advocate of violence but this makes you wonder about the ethics of beating such guys up. The legal system seems pointless.

You're wondering about the ethics of beating someone up to get what you want?

It might make the world a better place overall but likely cause problems for the beater.

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#154

Post by readams » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:30 PM UTC

6stringmerc wrote: post #28

So, no attempts to bring Davis in front of the Texas BAR association for unethical practices? I'm also curious why numerous developers have not demanded an Insurance Protection Product / Plan that would take a premium in return for subrogation (defense) if a frivolous Patent Suit is filed. I'm rather certain the market exists and while it may be for larger businesses or players, developers forming a Mutual Company an…

The insurance would cost more than the expected cost of the litigation which is of course how insurance works. They key with the patent system is that you have to pay millions to defend yourself, but it's exceptionally rare to be able to recover attorney's fees even if you win.

So in the end it's a choice between capitulating and paying some amount (and perhaps unleashing more trolls in the future) or wasting millions and many many hours of your time over years of your life defending yourself.

There's no way to win, which is why this is now a big industry.

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#155

Post by pdabbadabba » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:31 PM UTC

clavalle wrote: post #152

pdabbadabba wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of those hated attorneys. And, in my experience, while there are issues that sometimes may seem to outsiders like pointless minutae that keep people from getting at the real issues, the rules of civil procedure (especially at the federal level) are designed to do exactly what you want: to facilitate getting to the core of the issue as fast as possible (of course, if the core of the issue is a factual question…

> one of the first things the rules would have you do is to file a motion to dismiss arguing exactly those points. Great! How much would getting to that point typically cost a defendant in the case of a fairly obvious bullshit patent?

Possibly quite a bit, if you want it done well. And that's a problem. But that has little to do with the point I was making.

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#156

Post by knodi123 » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:33 PM UTC

gpm wrote: post #119

gph wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple knew it was a frivolous lawsuit that it barely needs to defend itself against, then it probably wouldn't put any money into the fund and just defend itself with half of whatever you put into the fund. Maybe I'm reading the parent comment wrong, but I assumed this system would allow for unequal funding between the two sides. So if you think it's a frivolous lawsuit that you can easily win you would just let t…

The problem knodi is raising is that pro se litigants don't have the same cause as normal ones, because they aren't paying for lawyers. A solution to this might be to say that any money not sent on the case is given back to the person who payed more, so it's not an avenue for making money.

You'd need to also disallow pro-se litigants paying themselves a fair wage out of legal costs, in order to defeat this clause of my evil scheme: "Apple would be paying me a salary equal to whatever their legal team makes for the duration of the trial".

Which is maybe not an unreasonable solution, but it strikes me as fraught with unintended consequences.

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#157

Post by thegasman » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:34 PM UTC

clavalle wrote: post #151

thegasman wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the issues raised by your comment are the result of civil procedural rules. These rules are not intentionally designed to postpone rulings on the merits, and instead were built on historical understandings of how a dispute should be fairly addressed: 1) communicate problem to adverse party 2) adverse party responds 3) fact-finding 4) written arguments aimed at resolution 5) trial by judge/peers (if necessary)…

Not speed but cost of which time is definitely a factor. Getting to the merits is the point but the point is often lost in the game of the process. True statement?

>Getting to the merits is the point but the point is often lost in the game of the process. True statement?

True, but you're assuming that the process and the merits are totally distinct (in fact, my own comment reads that way ;]).

But, as another commenter noted, processes themselves can influence merits (e.g. missing a filing deadline, or enforcing discovery requests).

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#158

Post by vermontdevil » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:35 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #132

comboy wrote: post #5

Couldn't Google offer defense in such cases for its users? Every case is the same so it shouldn't even be that expensive (I guess, IANAL), and it would discourage future cases because the troll would know he will have to fight against Google.

I guess I am stupid, why isn't Google the defendant, other than the fact they have too much money. This is like being sued for shopping at the wrong store.

Because it's easier to make money going after small business knowing these business can't afford a lawsuit.

One of these troll companies made $30 million a year doing this and they are even listed on the stock exchange!!

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#159

Post by developer2 » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:36 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #132

comboy wrote: post #5

Couldn't Google offer defense in such cases for its users? Every case is the same so it shouldn't even be that expensive (I guess, IANAL), and it would discourage future cases because the troll would know he will have to fight against Google.

I guess I am stupid, why isn't Google the defendant, other than the fact they have too much money. This is like being sued for shopping at the wrong store.

The problem is that the "patent" (fucking loose term of the word for something that should never have been allowed to be filed) is about the use of the code in question. It's not the App Store that is supposedly infringing, it's the use of the App Store. What a joke.

Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

#160

Post by MichaelGG » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 6:37 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #132

comboy wrote: post #5

Couldn't Google offer defense in such cases for its users? Every case is the same so it shouldn't even be that expensive (I guess, IANAL), and it would discourage future cases because the troll would know he will have to fight against Google.

I guess I am stupid, why isn't Google the defendant, other than the fact they have too much money. This is like being sued for shopping at the wrong store.

As I understand, patent liability doesn't stop at any point. So your customers can be sued for using your infringing ptoduct. This has the effect of letting patent owners choose who to go after.