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

SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

sparkfun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 186 posts

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#11

Post by bob33212 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

I wonder if one could make trolling patent trolls self-sustaining. For example, let’s say you get hit with a demand letter. I review it and agree to finance your case. Using my resources, I prepare to invalidate the troll’s patents unless they settle for some amount less than their expected lifetime value from said patents. This gets split between you and me (after litigation costs), with maybe some of my share reser…

I think you could scare off a good number of these trolls by saying.

"I look forward to the discovery processes during this lawsuit as well as reviewing the prior art associated with this patent. I will be creating a blog to document this process for public consumption as soon as the lawsuit is filed."

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#12

Post by JumpCrisscross »

whatshisface wrote: post #8
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

I wonder if one could make trolling patent trolls self-sustaining. For example, let’s say you get hit with a demand letter. I review it and agree to finance your case. Using my resources, I prepare to invalidate the troll’s patents unless they settle for some amount less than their expected lifetime value from said patents. This gets split between you and me (after litigation costs), with maybe some of my share reser…

The lifetime value of having a patent is much higher than the lifetime value of any specific patent. That's because the scam works whether the patent is valuable or not. Invalidating a patent costs them the time it takes to get a new one.

> Invalidating a patent costs them the time it takes to get a new one

The threat would only work if it were in respect of a large swathe of the troll’s portfolio. Agree it would be meaningless if done against a few of their patents, or if the patents were trivial to file for.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#13

Post by sharemywin »

ohazi wrote: post #6

> > The cost is further reduced by employing only static or dynamic ram as a means for holding the state of the system. [...] > Dynamic ram? Can I poke fun at them for not knowing what RAM is? Yes I can. > The above paragraph succinctly describes malloc(), which is perhaps one of the most fundamental advancements in modern computing. The problem is that Al didn’t invent it. Memory management (the ability to take RAM…

I remember when I toured a research nuclear reactor and I was talking with the nuclear phd student and I said something about an alpha particle and the protons and neutrons. And they were trying to say alpha particles aren't made up of protons and neutrons. Made me realize than that even an expert in the field might not know something that I would have thought was common knowledge.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#15

Post by foodstances »

gonehome wrote: post #5

I wonder if it's possible to make some sort of patent troll insurance company. Basically a company that attempts to collect as many patents as possible to weaponize against trolls and then provides legal protection to clients from trolls. The clients can share their patents with the insurance company too to help them become more powerful. Then when sued by a troll the insurance company goes scorched earth to destroy…

https://lotnet.com/

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#16

Post by rrss »

ohazi wrote: post #6

> > The cost is further reduced by employing only static or dynamic ram as a means for holding the state of the system. [...] > Dynamic ram? Can I poke fun at them for not knowing what RAM is? Yes I can. > The above paragraph succinctly describes malloc(), which is perhaps one of the most fundamental advancements in modern computing. The problem is that Al didn’t invent it. Memory management (the ability to take RAM…

pretty sure the author is describing how the "runtime reconfiguration" described in the next two sentences of the lawsuit after the one you quoted is a memory allocator, not confused and thinking "dynamic RAM" means "dynamically allocated memory"

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#17

Post by dbt00 »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #3

> Patent trolls are Americans that are destroying American manufacturing and small business Why should the identity of their victims matter? Also, are they?

> > Patent trolls are Americans that are destroying American manufacturing and small business

> Why should the identity of their victims matter? Also, are they?

Because this is a fairly American problem with the American patent system in particular and the ultimate target of pieces like this are American lawmakers and voters.

It's not that only American victims matter, it's that this problem is fairly American in nature and scope.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#18

Post by ohazi »

rrss wrote: post #16
ohazi wrote: post #6

> > The cost is further reduced by employing only static or dynamic ram as a means for holding the state of the system. [...] > Dynamic ram? Can I poke fun at them for not knowing what RAM is? Yes I can. > The above paragraph succinctly describes malloc(), which is perhaps one of the most fundamental advancements in modern computing. The problem is that Al didn’t invent it. Memory management (the ability to take RAM…

pretty sure the author is describing how the "runtime reconfiguration" described in the next two sentences of the lawsuit after the one you quoted is a memory allocator, not confused and thinking "dynamic RAM" means "dynamically allocated memory"

This line appears to suggest otherwise.

> Dynamic ram? Can I poke fun at them for not knowing what RAM is? Yes I can.

He's trying to nitpick about the term "dynamic" in this context, which he has misunderstood to mean "dynamic allocation" (i.e. the alternative to "static allocation"). The phrase "static or dynamic RAM" is basically never used to refer to memory allocation, it refers to the physical construction of the memory. This is especially true if the paragraph is next to a block diagram that includes an ALU... They are five levels removed from any sort of allocator.

The rest of the paragraph doesn't describe a memory allocator, it's describing runtime reconfiguration of a circuit, which you can do (and often do do) using a statically allocated configuration block or even a hard-wired dedicated memory. Again, nothing to do with malloc.

Whether a configuration memory is SRAM or DRAM based is immaterial, but patent language likes to make a point of enumerating the possibilities.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#19

Post by W-Stool »

Did I miss in the article what the author plans to do about this? It is one thing to poke fun at patent trolls, but when you are the target of the troll legally you need to do something. What's their response going to be?

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#20

Post by staticautomatic »

alisonkisk wrote: post #10
gonehome wrote: post #5

I wonder if it's possible to make some sort of patent troll insurance company. Basically a company that attempts to collect as many patents as possible to weaponize against trolls and then provides legal protection to clients from trolls. The clients can share their patents with the insurance company too to help them become more powerful. Then when sued by a troll the insurance company goes scorched earth to destroy…

1. This is called a patent pool. It's very common. 2. You can't sue a parent troll for patent infringement, since they don't have any technology business. They are only "companies" on paper.

You can preemptively sue them, albeit not for infringing on your IP. It’s called declaratory relief.
Post reply on HN