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

Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 117 posts

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#51

Post by walrus01 »

LukeShu wrote: post #34

For those wanting to evaluate whether they think the Tesla Semi infringes on the patents, the 3 patents are: U.S. Pat. D811,944 (issued March 6, 2018) on fuselage shape http://pimg-fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/44/119/D08/0.pdf U.S. Pat. D811,968 (issued March 6, 2018) on wrap windshield http://pimg-fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/68/119/D08/0.pdf U.S. Pat. D816,004 S (issued April 24, 2018) on side doors http://pimg-fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/04/1…

How you can patent the shape of a fuselage is nuts, when it should be easy to show prior art for wind tunnel work by others going back to the early 1950s.

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#52

Post by LukeShu »

Bartweiss wrote: post #35
_r_o_y_ wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you I don't understand why people are so quick to call a company a "patent troll" diluting the meaning.

I'm not sure what the origin of "patent troll" is, but common sources (e.g. Wikipedia) certainly don't say it's limited to non-practicing entities. Patent trolling is an attempt to secure patents for the purposes of making money via lawsuits or licenses far in excess of the patent's actual value, using the threat of legal costs or hefty infringement penalties. This is particularly true when the patented trait is inci…

> Their suit claims 'damages' which are a large fraction of ...

They have 6.3 billion revenue worth of pre-orders on the Nikola One.

> A quick check of the side door patent ... "is not a non-obvious advance on what exists"

It is a design patent, which covers non-functional ornamental design. Think of it as more similar to a trademark than to a regular patent. It doesn't have to be an advance on what exists, it just has to be aesthetically distinctive.

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#53

Post by butslob »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #33
ams6110 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter if they are a practicing entity or not Yes it does, the key characteristic of patent "trolling" is that the patent owner is not practicing. I had heard of Nikola before this, because they have been featured on this site, and in other news outlets catering to EV-enthusiasts. Many patents seem to me to be dumb, or for completely non-novel, obvious things ("one click ordering", etc), but the patent o…

I assume they’re going to settle for $0, as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway.

>as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway.

Because Tesla has all kinds of money to burn on lawsuits?

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#54

Post by butslob »

jacquesm wrote: post #16
monochromatic wrote: post #3

How is this a patent troll? Nikola isn’t a non-practicing entity. They have their own competing product. Was the Apple-Samsung patent litigation “patent trolling?”

It doesn't matter if they are a practicing entity or not: they are still clearly using their patents in a trolling fashion. After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this, (2) these patents are too dumb for words, (3) good luck showing $2B in damages and (if any) and (4) if you really believe that Nikola is now associated with Tesla because of battery fires then you're silly. These people are patent trolls…

>After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this

For real? I read about them on this site.

I know HN gives Tesla credit for a lot, but there were and are people working on electric semis; Tesla didn't come up with the idea.

>These people are patent trolls pure and simple

(in your opinion)

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#56

Post by jacquesm »

wlesieutre wrote: post #49
jacquesm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter if they are a practicing entity or not: they are still clearly using their patents in a trolling fashion. After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this, (2) these patents are too dumb for words, (3) good luck showing $2B in damages and (if any) and (4) if you really believe that Nikola is now associated with Tesla because of battery fires then you're silly. These people are patent trolls…

> (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this Previous discussion of Nikola on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11683508 I think most people who follow electric vehicles at all seriously have heard of them.

Sure, but that's a very small group of people. If you had taken a straw poll of 10 truckers three weeks ago I highly doubt any of them would have been able to name them.

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#58

Post by jacquesm »

butslob wrote: post #53
toomuchtodo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they’re going to settle for $0, as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway.

> as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway. Because Tesla has all kinds of money to burn on lawsuits?

Being sued is the price of admission of operating a business in the United States. That said I wished it wasn't this lawsuit.

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#59

Post by [deleted] »

butslob wrote: post #53
toomuchtodo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they’re going to settle for $0, as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway.

> as Tesla will litigate until Nikola exhausts their runway. Because Tesla has all kinds of money to burn on lawsuits?

[deleted]

Re: Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors

#60

Post by jacquesm »

butslob wrote: post #54
jacquesm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter if they are a practicing entity or not: they are still clearly using their patents in a trolling fashion. After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this, (2) these patents are too dumb for words, (3) good luck showing $2B in damages and (if any) and (4) if you really believe that Nikola is now associated with Tesla because of battery fires then you're silly. These people are patent trolls…

> After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this For real? I read about them on this site . I know HN gives Tesla credit for a lot, but there were and are people working on electric semis; Tesla didn't come up with the idea. > These people are patent trolls pure and simple (in your opinion)

> For real? I read about them on this site.

With a four minute old account? Or did you just make an account to enter the discussion here after lurking here for years? Or did you just make this account to stir the pot?

> I know HN gives Tesla credit for a lot, but there were and are people working on electric semis; Tesla didn't come up with the idea.

Yes, and nobody here said that.

But Tesla does have good name recognition with the general public and Nikola (coincidence?) does not.

> (in your opinion)

Maybe not in yours but according to the general definition of 'patent troll' they are.

Post reply on HN