Really seems like Google/Apple should make some kind of statement calling out how ridiculous these lawsuits are.
Doesn't sound like Google. If it had affected Newegg on the other hand...
Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
251–260 of 431 posts
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
That helps, but the judge working cases his son's law firm also works is pretty bad too.
To be clear, Meyer does not allege anything of that sort in the clip. He says, "Bo Davis is a lawyer in the Eastern District of Texas that represents patent trolls and their victims. Bo Davis is Judge Leonard Davis's son working a law practice in the very same district in which his father is a judge. So, if Judge Leonard Davis can encourage more patent trolls to bring more lawsuits into the Eastern District of Texas,…
>>Not really a clear-cut recusal situation.
One of those 3 letter federal agencies, that government spends $billions on, needs to look at this "not really clear cut situation".
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wasn't disagreeing, i was asking earnestly. Also, you didn't answer the question as asked. If the goal is "file motion telling judge 'patent is not valid' without doing literally anything else", what exactly is the money spent on?
And I meant to give an earnest answer! If you are the defendant in a relatively simple patent case, where the patent is clearly invalid, the right procedural move is probably a motion to dismiss, which could come right at the beginning of the litigation. But merely drafting that motion will be costly, simply due to the cost of legal services. EDIT: Of course, it often is not actually clear whether a patent is valid a…
Ok, i guess you simply underestimated just how little the layman knows. :D
> drafting that motion
I'm going by this particular case, where the patent is obvious and patent bullshit. I would imagine that here a motion would be a form letter that could be handled in less than an hour? (Going by experiences in the german law system where i've seen a form letter to an unpaying client go out, cost and take effect, for half an hour billed.)
And yeah, in other cases it may be less obvious. I'm only talking about the case at hand, and other similar ones, where the patent can be seen to be invalid by anyone with good high school education and above.
Heck, shouldn't it be possible to informally request from the judge to say whether he already sees the patent is bullshit or not?
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#254I find it oddly funny how Google hasn't stepped in to support their "clients", I'd think they'd help shutdown patent trolls so developers can continue to improve and distribute applications
Because Google has a great track record of caring about Android developers? They are basically monopoly (in western markets at least), they don't need to do anything to turn profit. They are happy to collect their 30% while spending almost nothing (directly that is - on support for example).
The Google Play Store didn't write it self.... Those developers cost real money.
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#255Is the process of filing a patent patented?
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#256Judge Leonard Davis presides over a large amount of these "Patent Troll" cases, and his son (!!) Bo Davis is a Lawyer who represents these very same Patent Trolls in court!
If that's not a racket, I don't know what is.
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style. Perhaps a competing troll owns the iteration patent.
No, iteration is fair game, but `for` is an API name patented by Oracle. Legally, a patent troll would have to write a `whenceforth`, `do...thither`, or `oft` loop.
*copyrighted, not patented
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#258A comment from a reddit thread states: The gist behind this case is that the Judge's son owns patent law firm in East Texas where they often represent both sides. This guy doesn't live in East Texas. However, the dad lets these stupid cases into the town to bring business to his son. Really shady. I agree with clavelle's comment. It's not so much the laws, but the system that allows this to occur. Link here: https://…
It is more than shady; it looks like glaringly unethical behavior. The nepotism and conflict of interest are completely clear.
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style. Perhaps a competing troll owns the iteration patent.
No, iteration is fair game, but `for` is an API name patented by Oracle. Legally, a patent troll would have to write a `whenceforth`, `do...thither`, or `oft` loop.
They can use dogescript. In dogescript it's a much loop.
https://github.com/dogescript/dogescript/blob/master/LANGUAG...
Re: Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Good facts make good cases much more frequently than good lawyers make good cases. Demonstrably not in the case of patent lawsuits, especially in east texas.
I don't fully understand what you're insinuating. Could you explain?
Basically, some rules were established that allowed patent cases to be heard lightning fast in Texas' Eastern District and generally in favor of the plaintiff because the patent trolls knew these different rules for presenting arguments better than defendants did and abused the system.
"Ward’s rules unleashed what became known as the 'rocket docket.' In his first year on the bench, Ward heard 5 patent cases. In 2006 his docket had 87. 'I did not anticipate that there would be an explosion of lawsuits,' says the now-retired judge."
"Yet Marshall soon gained a reputation the judges may not have welcomed: it became known as a plaintiff’s playground, a place that frequently handed out tens, or even hundreds, of millions of dollars in damage awards. In 2006 the New York Times reported that of the patent cases that went to trial in Marshall, jurors ruled for plaintiffs 78 percent of the time, far more than the national average of 59 percent. From 2001 to 2006, plaintiffs prevailed in eighteen straight verdicts in Marshall."