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

#111

Post by monochromatic » Fri, May 04, 2018, 1:54 AM UTC

Bartweiss wrote: post #48

ams6110 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So with all that prior art, why were the patents granted? Whose responsibility is it to demonstrate novelty? Does the patent office do research for prior art? Or are producers of similar products supposed to constantly review and monitor patent applications and challenge them?

35 U.S.C. § 102 sets the standards for patentability. Interestingly, the relevant standards are simply statements about the condition of the world: unless— (1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention Patent applicants are expected to conduct prior art reviews and at…

> Patent applicants are expected to conduct prior art reviews and attempt to determine novelty, but this is done defensively - for the purposes of not wasting money on an obvious failure, or to head off anticipated claims of prior art by justifying the novel feature.

If that’s true, patent applicants fail to meet expectations 90+% of the time.

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

#112

Post by notlob » Fri, May 04, 2018, 1:56 AM UTC

Tomminn wrote: post #105

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…

Okay, is it just me or are these patents insane? Literally no words or limitations as to what the patent actually covers. Just a set of pictures, with the part they would like to have "patented" emboldened. Can't you just claim that Tesla's design is 1% different from the drawing and therefore not subject to this patent?

These are design patents, not utility patents. Chapter 1500 of the MPEP is the relevant reference, and in particular, 1502 distinguishes between design and utility patents.

> In general terms, a “utility patent” protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a “design patent” protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171).

https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1502.html

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

#113

Post by SantaBarbarian » Fri, May 04, 2018, 6:49 PM UTC

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's clearly not the proper use of "patent troll".

This is just the Tesla Branch Elonians extending their "the world is against our religion" into bizarre heights of delusion.

Nikola got patents granted. They are a real truck manufacturer, with real customers (including Budweiser's parent who just signed on. Big.), and don't remotely fit into the "patent troll" category.

After a while you just get tired of the All-Tesla-All-the-Time crowd complaining that other people are coming to the market-- probably with better management and more focus.

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

#114

Post by SantaBarbarian » Fri, May 04, 2018, 6:51 PM UTC

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?

Yeah, try to get the Branch Elonians to admit that TSLA has to retire $1.9 Billion of debt in the next 12 months. They do. Oops.

Meanwhile the CEO is insulting the financial community that keeps him afloat. I keep hearing how smart he is, but... sometimes...

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

#115

Post by SantaBarbarian » Fri, May 04, 2018, 6:55 PM UTC

TFortunato wrote: post #73

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…

>"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.

The system for granting patents could well let some weak ones through-- but litigation will figure it out.

It's how the game is played. so, I don't understand the anti-Nikola guys. Let's face it, if it works out their approach has some huge advantages over the 4 megawatt-hour packs the Tesla Semi is going to require.

it's all good.

and, no, Nikola is not a "patent troll" in any understanding of the words. The Branch Elonians are only slowly coming to the realization that Tesla has no sustainable advantages-- other than brand. which does have cachet. not sure that helps in Class 8 trucks, though.

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

#116

Post by SantaBarbarian » Fri, May 04, 2018, 6:57 PM UTC

manicdee wrote: post #106

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…

Everyone who follows Tesla knows about Nikola One, the super sexy class 8 tractor that promises to be a turbine/battery hybrid long range hauler. Shell teamed up with Airflow to build the Starship prototype which will be doing a test run this year. Sadly, functional requirements don’t trump patent filings (Apple vs Samsung) so Nikola is free to sue everyone whose aerodynamic truck design includes a curved windscreen.…

Completely agree. the patents could be weak-- or killer good-- it's not up to us to figure that out.

But Nikola is clearly a real company. And they have the right to defend their IP.

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

#117

Post by TheAdamist » Thu, May 17, 2018, 1:00 AM UTC

mark-r wrote: post #82

atonse wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still shouldn't be patentable. I understand if you're trying to prevent counterfeit. But Tesla trucks aren't trying to pass off as Nikola trucks or whatever vaporware that company has. Pure patent troll rubbish.

Maybe rubbish, but if it's legal rubbish then there's a problem. Our patent system is screwed up beyond belief. I had thought that maybe design patents were a new thing, but a little research shows they aren't. The first was in 1842, and the Coke bottle in 1915 is a notable example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent The only ray of light is that a design patent is invalid if the design has a functional bene…

Invalid if functional? Can only hope that aerodynamic windshield patent is invalid for that reason then.