271–280 of 431 posts
Is there a unified place one can donate to that people think is the best way to put some money toward real change in the system? I'm happy to send some money to the EFF, but I'd up that 100 times if I knew it was going 100% toward killing patent trolls and I thought it was the best organization to fight that fight.
Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8XknFl1l_8 He visits East Texas and shows that the 'offices' of the 'companies' that hold each patent are empty shells.
To save someone 8 minutes: Tl;dr: He visits the listed offices of several dozen patent trolls in East Texas, including one directly across from the court house. Each one is empty with no sign of human activity. One has a secretary who claims the address is the accounting firm for those businesses. Then one person comes out to say that he is "a representative" of the businesses, and that those businesses "are based in…
What about making an "anti patent troll" website that will allow users to share their legal approaches and documents and the rest of the defense materials. Some of them may be reusable. I guess it should significantly limit the legal costs for everyone and improve their position against trolls, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To save someone 8 minutes: Tl;dr: He visits the listed offices of several dozen patent trolls in East Texas, including one directly across from the court house. Each one is empty with no sign of human activity. One has a secretary who claims the address is the accounting firm for those businesses. Then one person comes out to say that he is "a representative" of the businesses, and that those businesses "are based in…
How is this fundamentally different from our beloved SV startups organizing themselves as Delaware C-Corps?
I 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
I would totally want this too, but legally, can Google do something here when they are not a party in this litigation?
welcome to a political system (and indeed a world) run by lawyers.
I guess we must secretly love getting screwed over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
#define supposing if #define whereas else
I know nothing about C. You can alias keywords like that?
I imagine if in future somebody gets such a patent lawsuit, they'd just rip up the letter and throw it away. Police comes to carry out court orders because they decided in absence? "Sorry officer, the reason you're here is just patent bullshit." - "Oh well, I won't lift a finger for these idiots. Sorry for bothering you, have a nice day!"
Or a more extreme reaction: already in this thread, a couple of people are fantasizing about violence, hiring a hitman and so on. I realize it is mostly meant jokingly, but self-justice is another effect of a justice system that's lost legitimacy.
Rule-of-law is a great thing to have, but it only works if these laws are somewhat reasonable and in accord with peoples moral values...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
#define supposing if #define whereas else
I know nothing about C. You can alias keywords like that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not even sure where to begin with this :) First, you can't sue a state without their permission, they have sovereign immunity. Second, you would have no standing unless you were directly affected Third, outside of violating non-binding legal ethics rules, it's not clear what law you think this somehow violates. The state can pretty much do whatever it wants here. Plus, all of this is federal anyway, so suing the…
A lawsuit might not be appropriate, but there is a separate 'right to petition the government' for that.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/right-to-sue
They have essentially grounded these claims in due process violations, etc, and then found a right to file those lawsuits. Not a right to sue for anything.
When they have tried to find rights in the right to petition (and i will grant that historically, it included a right to sue), it has been cases where someone is directly trying to affect a constitutional right.
Also nobody has to give a damn about what you say:
"Nothing in the First Amendment or in this Court's case law interpreting it suggests that the rights to speak, associate, and petition require government policymakers to listen or respond to communications of members of the public on public issues."