Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors • Hacker News Board

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

#71

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:14 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #60

butslob wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 recog…

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

Still entirely unsure what relevance general public knowledge of a company has to do with the validity of their patents...

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

#72

Post by dingaling » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:14 PM UTC

loceng wrote: post #40

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are design patents. They can't be bogus if they are sufficiently original. The Tesla design looks pretty damn similar to the Nikola.

Aerodynamics are aerodynamics, I'd argue it's an attempt to patent part of well-known physics. Likewise, Tesla already has full windshield design in their other vehicles, and it's logical they'd extend that to other vehicles in their fleet of offerings. On a side note, I don't know what patents Nikola has. They obviously don't have the brand recognition of Tesla and Elon Musk, and so they're clearly scared. I feel fo…

> Aerodynamics are aerodynamics

Boeing has been patenting the design of its aircraft since the late 1920s...

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

#73

Post by TFortunato » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:14 PM UTC

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…

>"who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this"

I mean, apparently some large companies like Anheuser-Busch, (people who actually buy trucks) have heard of them, if they announced they are buying up to 800 of them from Nikola...

That said, I do agree that these (and a LOT of design patents) are questionable at best, but I don't have any skin in the game when it comes to the trucking industry.

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

#74

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:15 PM UTC

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.

[deleted]

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

#75

Post by NeutronStar » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:17 PM UTC

LukeShu wrote: post #50

TheAdamist wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the side door is patentable is beyond me. Apparently trucks have never had side doors before. The others just look generically futuristic & maybe aerodynamic versions of a current semi.

All 3 are design patents, which are patents on non-functional ornamental design of functional items. They aren't patenting side doors, they are patenting the way the side doors look.

It doesn't even look the same, it's square and goes up to floor level for Tesla, Nikola's is round and doesn't go all the way down. And they barely patented it like a week ago. This is pure trolling.

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

#76

Post by jacquesm » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #70

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…

> they are still clearly using their patents in a trolling fashion. After all: (1) who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this Wait, what? "Screw you small company, -we've- never heard of you, so why should you be able to defend your patents?"

Small? They are not small, merely not as well known as Tesla. And Tesla has as good - or maybe even better - a claim of them trying to profit of Tesla's good name in electrical vehicles than they do about the damages they claim they incurred.

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

#77

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #62

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?”

Would you say that a company can become a "patent troll" by your strict definition after trying and failing to market an actual product? Are you sure that this lawsuit doesn't signal them giving up and looking for other ways to recoup their investments?

> Are you sure that this lawsuit doesn't signal them giving up and looking for other ways to recoup their investments?

They've got billions of dollars worth of preorders; there's no sign they've either had trouble marketing a product or given up on it.

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

#78

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #9

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?”

Look at the pictures. They look about as similar as a Ford does to a Dodge. The grill, headlamps, body panels, windshield, hell, even the length of the truck is completely different between the two trucks. A truck is a truck, you can't patent the form factor of a truck.

> A truck is a truck, you can't patent the form factor of a truck.

Yes, you can patent non-functional design elements of any product.

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

#79

Post by jacquesm » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #71

jacquesm wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 recog…

> But Tesla does have good name recognition with the general public and Nikola (coincidence?) does not. Still entirely unsure what relevance general public knowledge of a company has to do with the validity of their patents...

They are design patents, not patents for technology.

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

#80

Post by gzu » Thu, May 03, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

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…

So these were all issued just recently in 2018? Were they submitted after the Telsa semi prototype has been known to the public? That’s been at least a year or so.