I was half expecting to read an article about counterfeit golf balls, or a factory side selling its customers product. Not even close, this is interesting.
A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
41–50 of 280 posts
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#42American courts should have a "Loser pays" rule, and stricter standards for determining what is a frivolous lawsuit warranting additional penalties for the filer. American jurisprudence has always favored making sure "everyone gets their day in Court" to the point where trolls and professional litigants are ruining things.
What happens if your small business sues Google? Right or wrong, you are betting the business on that case. If you lose, Google's legal costs will consume your entire business.
That said, it's hard for your small business to sue Google anyway.
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#43> Companies with deep pockets lock down the market by making it too expensive for competitors to operate and to offer lower-priced yet quality products. It is a legitimate tactic; even those who succumb to it don’t really begrudge the approach. Who the hell wrote this article, the CEO of Acushnet? "Don't get the wrong idea, small businesses love being sued over frivolous patents they never infringed upon!"
Which part are you commenting on? Is it the use of the word "legitimate"? Because suing someone for patent infringement is a "legitimate" course of action, i.e. it's a lawful thing to do. In fact (AFAIK IANAL etc etc) it's the only way to ascertain whether a patent is being infringed or not without working with the opposition directly and sharing trade secrets outside the context of a court room with proper protectio…
Those aren't the issues discussed in the article, other than in the broadest sense.
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#44> Companies with deep pockets lock down the market by making it too expensive for competitors to operate and to offer lower-priced yet quality products. It is a legitimate tactic; even those who succumb to it don’t really begrudge the approach. Who the hell wrote this article, the CEO of Acushnet? "Don't get the wrong idea, small businesses love being sued over frivolous patents they never infringed upon!"
"Ho hum, we've been driven out of business by legal maneuvering, but it's all in good sport." You don't often see such a laissez-faire attitude towards one's livelihood amongst small businesses.
One reason to be so nonchalant would be that the guy did in fact copy someone's patents wholesale, and was just waiting for the day someone would notice. If you know the lawsuit is unwinnable and not frivolous, no point complaining about it.
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#45> Companies with deep pockets lock down the market by making it too expensive for competitors to operate and to offer lower-priced yet quality products. It is a legitimate tactic; even those who succumb to it don’t really begrudge the approach. Who the hell wrote this article, the CEO of Acushnet? "Don't get the wrong idea, small businesses love being sued over frivolous patents they never infringed upon!"
Which part are you commenting on? Is it the use of the word "legitimate"? Because suing someone for patent infringement is a "legitimate" course of action, i.e. it's a lawful thing to do. In fact (AFAIK IANAL etc etc) it's the only way to ascertain whether a patent is being infringed or not without working with the opposition directly and sharing trade secrets outside the context of a court room with proper protectio…
I think you missed the part where they implied these lawsuits are often completely without merit. It's abuse of the parent system to stifle competition, and we're supposed to believe business owners just shrug it off after they're bullied into bankruptcy?
> “We weren’t infringing. But we couldn’t afford to fight the case,” he says. Instead, his company settled the 2015 claims with Acushnet by agreeing to get out of the golf-ball business altogether
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which part are you commenting on? Is it the use of the word "legitimate"? Because suing someone for patent infringement is a "legitimate" course of action, i.e. it's a lawful thing to do. In fact (AFAIK IANAL etc etc) it's the only way to ascertain whether a patent is being infringed or not without working with the opposition directly and sharing trade secrets outside the context of a court room with proper protectio…
Those aren't the issues discussed in the article, other than in the broadest sense.
I know, I was just replying to the parent's comment and highlighting that suing (AFAIK) is the only way to enforce patent rights. Apart from maybe threatening to sue, but same-difference there really.
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#47Costco sued J&J Vision Care a few years ago over anti-consumer behavior in the contact lenses industry (I characterize it as anti-consumer. The Vision Care industry characterizes it as pro-consumer). They dropped the lawsuit in 2016, probably because Johnson and Johnson discontinued the practice: https://www.law360.com/articles/800034/costco-drops-antitrus... Costco did support a different lawsuit by state of Utah ag…
WRT prices of contact lenses, I use an ultrasonic contact lens cleaner with plain saline (Ringer's will also work if that is cheaper in your area), then storing the contact lenses in my lens solution to disinfect. Far better comfort profile, for far longer, than I ever obtained following the manufacturer instructions of 20 seconds rubbing on each side, and 5 seconds rinsing on each side. The saline is half as much as…
dude just go to dailies
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
The following patent numbers cited in this[1]: 6994638 8123632 8444507 9320944 8025593 8257201 7331878 6358161 7887439 7641572 7163472 [1] http://golf-patents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/20170317-...
Great document: Costco goes through every single patent claim and say, Nope we don't do that. Then ask for money for their lawyers. > an award to Costco of its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or as otherwise permitted by law;
It's even funnier, not only do they go through each patent and say they don't infringe because of X, they also say that each patent is invalid because of Y. And then they ask for money for their lawyers. :-D
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether that's true or not, I don't think it's enough to rely on the invisible hand to squelch this practice. The truth is, as long as it is advantageous to sue frivolously, companies will do it. And this is bad for the free market, the economy, and consumers. Policy change should make it much more costly to launch a frivolous lawsuit (as distinct from a claim made in good faith), e.g. by making it much easier for a…
Similar to the email spam proposals, charge a modest fee for each motion filed. Set it at a point that isn't a barrier for anyone filing a "normal" amount of motions, but where it increases to real money if your main business is filing large amounts of know-it-will-fail paperwork.
[deleted]
Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether that's true or not, I don't think it's enough to rely on the invisible hand to squelch this practice. The truth is, as long as it is advantageous to sue frivolously, companies will do it. And this is bad for the free market, the economy, and consumers. Policy change should make it much more costly to launch a frivolous lawsuit (as distinct from a claim made in good faith), e.g. by making it much easier for a…
Similar to the email spam proposals, charge a modest fee for each motion filed. Set it at a point that isn't a barrier for anyone filing a "normal" amount of motions, but where it increases to real money if your main business is filing large amounts of know-it-will-fail paperwork.
Filing motions is not their main business. Their main business is putting down competitors. In fact the only reason it works is that they have enough revenue that they can retain lawyers (expensive) to do these things without affecting their bottom line much. Lawyers aren't cheap for Acushnet either, they just have the cash to throw around.
Adding fees just hurts small players more. This sounds like a "solution" that makes the problem worse.