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

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

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 431 posts

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

#341

Post by rayiner »

Cshelton wrote: post #314
rayiner wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google could agree to indemnify app developers for legal fees. There are certain restrictions on other people paying for your legal defense but it's commonly done subject to those restrictions. They could also take the first app developer to get sued under the patent and pay for them to file a CBM review. Or file an IPR or PGR in their own right seeking to invalidate the patent.

If Google just paid for the defense of the developers, without patent reform, wouldn't that just encourage more patent trolls to arise, knowing there is a massive pot of gold?

There would be no massive pot of gold, because Google would not be a party potentially liable for damages.

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

#342

Post by bluejekyll »

ZainRiz wrote: post #321
Cshelton wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google just paid for the defense of the developers, without patent reform, wouldn't that just encourage more patent trolls to arise, knowing there is a massive pot of gold?

Only if the trolls won. On the other hand, if Google's lawyers gave them the smack down then all the patent trolls would go scurrying back under the rocks they crawled out from

I think trolls live under a bridge, in either case, it's not a horrible enough place for them.

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

#343

Post by wongarsu »

300bps wrote: post #229
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…

How would the insurance policy differentiate between patent trolling and legitimate patent abuses? Because I could foresee a company purchasing this insurance and then willy-nilly violating patents to their hearts content.

The insurance company could cover legal costs, but only until they lost X of your cases (for small X).

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

#345

Post by teleclimber »

caf wrote: post #315
Steko wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this fundamentally different from our beloved SV startups organizing themselves as Delaware C-Corps?

It's really not. They're both forms of jurisdictional arbitrage.

It's a similar legal maneuver but with very different outcomes.

In one case you're jut trying to set your company up to avoid paying too much taxes, in the other you're forcing the people you're trolling to a) travel far from home to defend themselves against your likely unfair lawsuit, and b) be at a disadvantage in front of a judge who is known to tilt things in your favor.

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

#347

Post by ramblenode »

vosbert wrote: post #205

Can these services just be disabled in East Texas to avoid their jurisdiction? At the very least, it would force the patent trolls into more neutral territory.

I have been wondering the same thing. If not outright disabling the service, would it be sufficient to license one's software in a way that prohibits it being used in East Texas? Would that remove standing to sue in the district?

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

#348

Post by ben174 »

Bjorkbat wrote: post #259
krisdol wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I'm just waiting for one of these languages to catch on, gain traction, and become a real respected language used in business settings.

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

#349

Post by [deleted] »

mobilefriendly wrote: post #301
hospes wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>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".

This corruption is a government feature, not a bug. Washington needs trial lawyer money and has had trouble figuring out how to fleece Silicon Valley directly, so trial lawyer patent abuse is a win-win for Congress and the Obama Administration. Remember-- the entire basis of this nonsense is the patent office issuing vague patents, everything is running exactly to plan.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN