The rich irony of a company that patented round corners taking the high moral ground against patent "trolls" or whatever their called
Design patents are pretty different from regular utility patents.
Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
21–30 of 200 posts
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#22I suspect this won't actually prevent lawsuits in the Eastern district. With internet shopping and the new store just across the district line, lawyers should be able to argue that Apple is indeed doing business in the region. It will just waste a bit of lawyer time. It almost feels like Apple is punishing the region for it's patent troll supporting ways.
> With internet shopping and the new store just across the district line, lawyers should be able to argue that Apple is indeed doing business in the region.
I'm pretty sure that's not how jurisdiction works.
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#23The rich irony of a company that patented round corners taking the high moral ground against patent "trolls" or whatever their called
Most patents filed big by corps are protective in nature.
It would be hard for Apple to sue people for 'round corners' - but it gives them a moat to protect themselves from trolls who patent 'round corners'.
But it does cause problems, because it causes hesitancy in other companies, i.e. 'swipe to unlock' patents etc..
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#24I suspect this won't actually prevent lawsuits in the Eastern district. With internet shopping and the new store just across the district line, lawyers should be able to argue that Apple is indeed doing business in the region. It will just waste a bit of lawyer time. It almost feels like Apple is punishing the region for it's patent troll supporting ways.
Should they not punish the region? The Eastern district is corrupt.
Oh man, imagine the riots and changes that would ensue is Amazon suddenly started blocking purchases from Eastern district residents...
"well we don't want to be considered as doing business there, y'all need to fix your courts..."
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#25The rich irony of a company that patented round corners taking the high moral ground against patent "trolls" or whatever their called
a
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should they not punish the region? The Eastern district is corrupt.
I can't see how it makes sense to punish the customers for the behavior of a Federal district judge who isn't elected by them. (The President appoints Federal judges and the Senate confirms them.)
The customers elect people who can influence the president.
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should they not punish the region? The Eastern district is corrupt.
Oh please. The fact that you don’t like patents doesn’t mean that judges who disagree are corrupt.
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't see how it makes sense to punish the customers for the behavior of a Federal district judge who isn't elected by them. (The President appoints Federal judges and the Senate confirms them.)
At least it draws attention to the matter which helps in the long run. You need awareness of the issue, for it to make it into the public debate. Right now, most voting people don't understand the evils of patent trolling.
And they are opening a new store very close to the existing stores, just out of the district. So people will only have 1 store to go to, but it will be pretty close. I too think this may draw some attention from people who live there who may demand a change. I'd bet that most people would care more about a convenient Apple store over some corrupt lawyers and judges making a money grab.
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#29I suspect this won't actually prevent lawsuits in the Eastern district. With internet shopping and the new store just across the district line, lawyers should be able to argue that Apple is indeed doing business in the region. It will just waste a bit of lawyer time. It almost feels like Apple is punishing the region for it's patent troll supporting ways.
That’s not true, thanks to recent precedent:
https://www.krcl.com/articles/patently-unpredictable-patent-...
> [T]he Federal Circuit in In re Cray rejected the Eastern District of Texas’ expansive four-factor test and set forth three requirements for determining whether a defendant has a “regular and established place of business” in the district: (1) there must be a physical place in the district; (2) it must be regular and established; and (3) it must be the place of the defendant.
Re: Apple to Close Stores in Eastern District of Texas to Fight Patent Trolls
#30It seems quite reasonable for apple to avoid the renegade court. The court is known to intentionally violate the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to the benefit of patent holders.[1] You must seek permission from the renegade judge in order to file Summary Judgement. "A party may move for summary judgment" They may not move for summary judgement, because the judge denies this in this court. "The court should state on…
They violate the FRCP? Please explain. (Your link is broken.)
The EFF explains it well in the other link. It is the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56. I quoted it twice. The Eastern District of Texas requires you to ask permission to file summary judgement, which the judge then can deny without explanation or reasoning. As such, while the rule says you "may move for summary judgement", this is not permitted in this court. It also says you get to hear the reason when the judge denies it. This you also do not get, as the judge will deny your ability to ask for it and the reason out of hand, and without explanation.
So we can understand that the first line of rule 56 is a lie in the eastern district of texas.