Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll • Hacker News Board

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#11

Post by jawns » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:21 PM UTC

Cloudflare says that it is willing to spend up to $50,000 to award people who dig up prior art that invalidates Blackbird's patents ($20,000 for prior art related to the lawsuit and $30,000 for prior art related to Blackbird's other patents).

BUT (and it's a big but, Sir Mix-a-Lot) ...

> These opportunities remain open as long as Blackbird's case against Cloudflare is still active.

So, what will likely happen is that as soon as Blackbird spots this blog post and realize that Cloudflare has no intention of settling, they withdraw their suit, and that means Cloudflare doesn't have to pay anybody a prior-art bounty.

That would actually be in keeping with a patent troll's M.O. They don't want to waste their time actually pursuing lawsuits against companies that are willing to push back. Instead, it's much more lucrative for them to shake down easy targets and reach a quick settlement.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#12

Post by PatentTroll » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:23 PM UTC

Just want to provide a contrarian view here: patent assertion and 'trolling' is not necessarily a bad thing in theory. It can create a secondary monetization route for inventors, instead of asserting it themselves. Now, that's all predicated on the validity of the patent and the degree of infringement, but it's not always a bad thing.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#13

Post by tpatke » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:31 PM UTC

1. Everyone who gets sued by a patent troll is going to complain about the validity of the patent. Even when the patent is, in fact, completely valid.

2. Patent troll + Law firm is not a "dangerous new breed". This has been happening for a long while now.

3. It seems strange to complain about the being sued for patent infringement while owning '150' patents. Do you agree with patents or not? If you agree, then being sued for patent infringement is part of it. If you disagree, why invest so much? I understand the argument of patents being defensive, but, does that really help in a world of patent trolls? More likely, a company eventually goes under and the patents are acquired on the cheap - by a troll.

4. I think the "we will pay you a bounty to help make our problem go away" approach is interesting and I hope it works. ...but it's very self serving. Maybe just pay a law firm $50,000 to invalidate the patent rather than making a contest out of it.

To be fair, I really don't understand the concept of a software patent. If I can implement it then it is fair game.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#14

Post by matt4077 » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:34 PM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #4

About the claim that the patenterrorists here have offered a contingency to the previous patent holder in addition to $1, wouldn't it be much more plausible that they threatened said holder with a patent lawsuit which they would not bring if they paid their extortion fee, in the form of the rights to the patent?

That wouldn't be "extortion" in the legal sense, which (typically) requires the thread to be something illegal, or otherwise unusually damaging to the victim. Simply saying "give me X or I will sue you" is just how it works.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#15

Post by degenerate » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:37 PM UTC

jawns wrote: post #11

Cloudflare says that it is willing to spend up to $50,000 to award people who dig up prior art that invalidates Blackbird's patents ($20,000 for prior art related to the lawsuit and $30,000 for prior art related to Blackbird's other patents). BUT (and it's a big but, Sir Mix-a-Lot) ... > These opportunities remain open as long as Blackbird's case against Cloudflare is still active. So, what will likely happen is that…

Yes I believe that is what Cloudflare is banking on - Blackbird backing out and no bounty money spent. I wouldn't find it too bad of an outcome though. Googling "blackbird patent" will pull up Cloudflare's blog post and other tech companies can use the same strategy against them by offering a bounty.

Patent troll invalidation bounties might become a new thing. The more ways to slay the trolls the better.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#16

Post by PatentTroll » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:42 PM UTC

tpatke wrote: post #13

1. Everyone who gets sued by a patent troll is going to complain about the validity of the patent. Even when the patent is, in fact, completely valid. 2. Patent troll + Law firm is not a "dangerous new breed". This has been happening for a long while now. 3. It seems strange to complain about the being sued for patent infringement while owning '150' patents. Do you agree with patents or not? If you agree, then being…

The wright flyer was just sticks, canvas, and a small engine. Anybody could have done it - in fact there were teams around the world competing to be the first ones. The Wright brothers got a patent on it. Should they have?

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#17

Post by openmosix » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:44 PM UTC

jawns wrote: post #11

Cloudflare says that it is willing to spend up to $50,000 to award people who dig up prior art that invalidates Blackbird's patents ($20,000 for prior art related to the lawsuit and $30,000 for prior art related to Blackbird's other patents). BUT (and it's a big but, Sir Mix-a-Lot) ... > These opportunities remain open as long as Blackbird's case against Cloudflare is still active. So, what will likely happen is that…

I had the very same reaction after reading this. A long post that describes how bad patent trolls are, a general call to embrace the fight, everyone should join the fight sponsored by Cloudflare and together we can win! But, if for whatever reason Blackbird leaves us alone and they bully someone else - not our problem anymore!

As someone who does not have a dog in this fight, I see no reasons to help them when it's blatantly obvious they are just fighting for themselves.

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#18

Post by billyvg » Thu, May 11, 2017, 4:52 PM UTC

tpatke wrote: post #13

1. Everyone who gets sued by a patent troll is going to complain about the validity of the patent. Even when the patent is, in fact, completely valid. 2. Patent troll + Law firm is not a "dangerous new breed". This has been happening for a long while now. 3. It seems strange to complain about the being sued for patent infringement while owning '150' patents. Do you agree with patents or not? If you agree, then being…

1. That is another issue, the USPTO issuing patents that shouldn't be issued.

3. They don't seem to be against patents, just against non-practicing entities. Did you even read the article?

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#19

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 11, 2017, 5:04 PM UTC

tpatke wrote: post #13

1. Everyone who gets sued by a patent troll is going to complain about the validity of the patent. Even when the patent is, in fact, completely valid. 2. Patent troll + Law firm is not a "dangerous new breed". This has been happening for a long while now. 3. It seems strange to complain about the being sued for patent infringement while owning '150' patents. Do you agree with patents or not? If you agree, then being…

[deleted]

Re: Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll

#20

Post by cornchips » Thu, May 11, 2017, 5:08 PM UTC

PatentTroll wrote: post #16

tpatke wrote: post #13

1. Everyone who gets sued by a patent troll is going to complain about the validity of the patent. Even when the patent is, in fact, completely valid. 2. Patent troll + Law firm is not a "dangerous new breed". This has been happening for a long while now. 3. It seems strange to complain about the being sued for patent infringement while owning '150' patents. Do you agree with patents or not? If you agree, then being…

The wright flyer was just sticks, canvas, and a small engine. Anybody could have done it - in fact there were teams around the world competing to be the first ones. The Wright brothers got a patent on it. Should they have?

In retrospect: No. Prior art.

They abused the system for their own gain, while at the same time "retarding the development of aviation".

"The Wrights' preoccupation with the legal issue hindered their development of new aircraft designs, and by 1910 Wright aircraft were inferior to those made by other firms in Europe. Indeed, aviation development in the U.S. was suppressed to such an extent that when the country entered World War I no acceptable American-designed aircraft were available, and U.S. forces were compelled to use French machines."

"The lawsuits damaged the public image of the Wright brothers, who previously had been generally regarded as heroes." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers_patent_war