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

21–30 of 186 posts

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#21

Post by rrss »

ohazi wrote: post #18
rrss wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

I read that line as poking fun of the fact that RAM is not capitalized because the lawyers that wrote this think "ram" is a word, not an acronym

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#22

Post by thaumasiotes »

sharemywin wrote: post #13
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.

There are some pretty obvious followup questions:

- What are alpha particles made of?

- When an element undergoes alpha decay, its atomic number is reduced by two. Where do the protons go?

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#23

Post by ohazi »

rrss wrote: post #21
ohazi wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

I read that line as poking fun of the fact that RAM is not capitalized because the lawyers that wrote this think "ram" is a word, not an acronym

Eh, shrug. I don't think so.

In any case, the fact that SparkFun doesn't even do semiconductor design makes this whole lawsuit even more ridiculous. They put chips onto boards, they don't design ALUs with special configurable control bits!

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#24

Post by _jal »

staticautomatic wrote: post #20
alisonkisk wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can only try that if you know they exist.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#25

Post by dekhn »

sharemywin wrote: post #13
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.

Right. I was pretty surprised and amused when I was learning nuclear chemistry and realized: an alpha particle is also a helium-4 nuclei, a beta particle is an electron/positron, and a gamma ray is just high energy electromagnetic radiation.

This is sort of because the discoveries were made before people were really aware of helium nuclei, electrons/positrons, or high energy EM, they just ran physical experiments in a lab and saw there were different kinds of radiation that had different physical properties, and under close inspection of those properties, the nature of the radiation was deduced.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#26

Post by staticautomatic »

_jal wrote: post #24
staticautomatic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You can only try that if you know they exist.

Sure, but they have to come up for air sooner or later.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#27

Post by bjt »

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…

See https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/defensive-patent-licen...

I did some work on this years before the article, while in law school. Seems to be defunct now.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#28

Post by rrss »

ohazi wrote: post #18
rrss wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

> The rest of the paragraph doesn't really 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.

IMO you are being much too generous in your interpretation of this trolling.

The claim is that pcDuino is infringing because it has a Cortex A9 with addressable memory. This chip does not have any of the fancy reconfiguration you have in mind, but the trolls believe it implements their patent, so I don't see how they can mean what you think they do.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#29

Post by ohazi »

rrss wrote: post #28
ohazi wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

> The rest of the paragraph doesn't really 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. IMO you are being much too generous in your interpretation of this trolling. The claim is that pcDuino is infringing because it has a Cortex A9 with addressable memory. Th…

No, I completely agree with you.

I'm nitpicking about a nitpick, and I feel kind of bad for derailing the conversation, because the patent assertion is completely ridiculous.

I just think that Nathan shouldn't have made the jab about malloc, because making that kind of mistake detracts from his otherwise very valid criticism.

Re: SparkFun Hooks a Patent Troll

#30

Post by akdor1154 »

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…

Might work, still sounds like a protection racket though.
Post reply on HN