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

Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 285 posts

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#41

Post by bradjohnson »

cstejerean wrote: post #35
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say I invent something really useful but also very difficult for an individual to take advantage of, like a new kind of airplane nosecone that shaves 10% off fuel costs for very large airplanes. Now, I'm not in the airplane business, and getting into it would take many, many millions of dollars. Probably the only way for me to make money on this would be to go to Boeing or some similar company and license my pa…

You could still sell your patent to an actual airline, and it could then use that patent exclusively and prevent airlines from doing so. In a sufficiently competitive market that might be enough. Boeing might buy your patent to prevent Airbus from using that tech and therefore gaining an advantage. Or if Boeing ignores your patent and just builds that tech anyway then they would expose themselves to future liability…

All of your options encourage a monopoly on the specific patent and ignore the possibility of licensing.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#42

Post by oskarth »

> So-called non-practicing entities — or holders of a patent for a process or product that they don’t plan to develop — often use them to sue companies that would sooner settle rather than pay what can add up to $1 million by the time a case reaches a courtroom.

Why on earth aren't non-practicing entity patent lawsuits outlawed? Seems like a no-brainer, and I can't imagine these firms being big enough to have any seriously lobbying power.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#43

Post by adekok »

mabbo wrote: post #38

> “[Is Blackbird] doing anything thing that is illegal or unethical?” continues Cheng. “For the most part, it’s unethical. But it’s probably not illegal.” If it's not illegal, more work needs to be done to make it illegal. Inventors always have avenues, moreso today than ever before.

While I agree it should likely be illegal, the solution to bad laws isn't more laws.

A better solution would be to

* do better examination of patents so that BS ones don't get issued

* allow third-parties to invalidate patents by showing prior art to the patent office for a nominal fee

* punish patent applicants who know about, or should have known about prior art

* if a patent is invalidated, force them to return all of the money they were paid for licenses and/or fees

See the lawsuits around the "Happy Birthday" song for similar problems:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-happy-birthday-l...

IIRC, the settlement came about because the plaintiffs were able to prove that the song had been published and put in the public domain. They had found a copy of a songbook which was the definitive proof.

How did they find the songbook? They were given a scanned copy in discovery... with most things clear, and the date suspiciously blurred. After a few months of looking, they found a print copy which confirmed their suspicions.

i.e. it looks like Warner Brothers deliberately fudged the evidence. If the plaintiffs hadn't noticed, or hadn't been able to find a print copy, people would still be paying license fees.

When there is no punishment for lawyers who break the law, I think that "ignorance of the law" is an excuse. There is just no way that ignorance isn't a defence for me, while at the same time the lawyers use the law to attack me, and aren't punished for their violations.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#44

Post by jgrahamc »

More detail on what we are doing from three blog posts:

Standing Up to a Dangerous New Breed of Patent Troll https://blog.cloudflare.com/standing-up-to-a-dangerous-new-b...

Project Jengo https://blog.cloudflare.com/project-jengo/

Patent Troll Battle Update: Doubling Down on Project Jengo https://blog.cloudflare.com/patent-troll-battle-update-doubl...

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#45

Post by adekok »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #10
FussyZeus wrote: post #4

I've never heard a good argument against this so I'll say it here: Require that the plaintiff in this cases show demonstrable, actual , and quantifiable loss by the activity of the defendant. It seems like such a no-brainer that a business suing for damage to it's business prospects after someone stole their idea would have to actually show how it was damaged. Even allowing very flimsy evidence would do a lot to diss…

Let's say I invent something really useful but also very difficult for an individual to take advantage of, like a new kind of airplane nosecone that shaves 10% off fuel costs for very large airplanes. Now, I'm not in the airplane business, and getting into it would take many, many millions of dollars. Probably the only way for me to make money on this would be to go to Boeing or some similar company and license my pa…

Good point. This is why legal issues are complicated. :(

But the counter is that if you're offering the technology for sale, then lack of sales is an actual loss. The thieves could have paid your price, but instead chose to steal it.

At that point, penalties, etc. apply,

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#46

Post by ivanbakel »

wglb wrote: post #6
ivanbakel wrote: post #3

I don't see anything game-changing about their approach. Fighting instead of settling should definitely be praised, but the only differences between this legal challenge and any of the previous ones are the result of recent changes in the law or the judiciary, which are beyond Cloudflare's control. Nothing suggests that patent-trolling itself as a "game" is going to shift or go away after this, and until that is made…

Then perhaps you missed one of the novel ideas Cloudflare is also filing a complaint with the ethics committee . And their talking to reporters.

That's a one-sentence action that's brushed over in the article. I see nothing suggesting it's novel or effective, and I don't have enough knowledge of patent suits to decide that.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#47

Post by prutschman »

jgrahamc wrote: post #21
tracker1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, if it weren't for the stupidity of the patent system, I don't know that Cloudflare would even have the patents. Has Cloudflare ever initiated patent litigation against anyone? The fact is that most patents for things that are "invented" but entirely virtually don't really deserve patent protection. Rarely is there significant research, expense or tooling to implement. Patents on software, processes and most…

Has Cloudflare ever initiated patent litigation against anyone? No, we have not.

Have you ever threatened to, or alluded to your ability to do so, to obtain commercial negotiating leverage in a context other than defending the company from the threat of a patent suit?

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#48

Post by jgrahamc »

prutschman wrote: post #47
jgrahamc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has Cloudflare ever initiated patent litigation against anyone? No, we have not.

Have you ever threatened to, or alluded to your ability to do so, to obtain commercial negotiating leverage in a context other than defending the company from the threat of a patent suit?

Not to my knowledge.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#49

Post by learc83 »

tareqak wrote: post #19
notyourday wrote: post #13

It is all about finding a correct pressure point. Long time ago certain Philadelphia area law firms decided to represent vegan protesters that created a major mess in a couple of high end restaurants. A certain flamboyant owner of one the restaurants targeted decided to have a good time applying his version of asymmetric warfare. The next partners from those law firm showed up to wine and dine their clients in the es…

This account seems more like poor planning on part of the lawyers. I would assume representing a client would imply a sort of temporary boycott on the part of the lawyers towards the client's legal adversary.

In a large firm, a lawyer isn't going to go through the active cases for every partner in the firm when choosing where to take clients for dinner.

Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game

#50

Post by dangrossman »

oskarth wrote: post #42

> So-called non-practicing entities — or holders of a patent for a process or product that they don’t plan to develop — often use them to sue companies that would sooner settle rather than pay what can add up to $1 million by the time a case reaches a courtroom. Why on earth aren't non-practicing entity patent lawsuits outlawed? Seems like a no-brainer, and I can't imagine these firms being big enough to have any ser…

> Why on earth aren't non-practicing entity patent lawsuits outlawed?

The NPE category includes universities and researchers. Many inventions can't be brought to market without significant capital, and not all inventors are interested in commercializing their inventions themselves. Just because you're not personally going to build a billion dollar chip fabrication facility to implement the new silicon etching process your research group patented shouldn't prevent you from licensing it to Intel and suing someone else that uses your invention without a license, IMO.

Post reply on HN