https://patents.google.com/patent/US20170170984 If you cut through the lawyer-speak, claim #1 is basically about MITM-ing the vehicle's internal message bus. Hardly novel, even in 2007.
Wow. The fact that this patent was even granted tells me we have morons in the patent offices or that there is serious corruption going on.
Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
131–140 of 318 posts
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#132Any engineer who has ever filed a software patent soon realizes that the entire patent system in America (at least with respect to software) is a scam. It seems to be designed to enrich lawyers and tax engineers. It's almost like all the kids in school who failed out of CS 101 went to law school and cooked up a scheme to tax their classmates who actually stuck it out and built something. Why the hell do we have a sys…
I've filed multiple (hardware) patents in previous companies. Which part, exactly, is a scam? I think the only reasonable criticisms of the patent system is a lack of intelligent lawyers in the areas of discipline that often fail finding similar claims in other filings, and that patents only benefit large companies, not DIY garage makers like the rest of the world thinks. I also think your shitting on lawyers is typi…
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#133There needs to be an anti-patent-troll membership organization. You pay a fee relative to some metric and the organization acts as insurance against parent trolls by fully defending any patent lawsuits that are obviously unjustified. And to keep costs low, membership in this organization would be public to deter patent trolls from even trying to sue a member in the first place.
I've seen an organization like this on HN in the past - but struggling to find the post. A quick search turned up https://lotnet.com/ which I think is it
Rpx is probably the closest thing. They will try to kill a patent if it is being used against their members. But they don’t cover the cost of litigation.
There are also patent pools where everyone pools their money to buy a certain patent.
There may be some insurance you can seek out. But I don’t know if anyone in the space that is using that type of thing
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#134I'm not shocked. I'm glad it is allowed by the US court system. The companies you are speaking of decided to settle by their own free will. You can have a litigant declared a vexatious litigant and barred from filing certain cases without going through a more stringent process. It is a shame that none of the companies has done that, but acting like the courts should protect businesses from being sued is ludicrous and would be easily abused by big corporations in their favor.
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#135Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#136I frankly don't understand why a judge or jury would ever find for a company which has no revenue, other than through litigation settlements. I mean if they're not even selling a license or royalties for their patents, any cases should be dismissed. We can call it the "use it or lose it" rule for patents.
There’s a simple reason for this - corruption. That’s why most of this suits are filed in a specific court in texas
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#137https://patents.google.com/patent/US20170170984 If you cut through the lawyer-speak, claim #1 is basically about MITM-ing the vehicle's internal message bus. Hardly novel, even in 2007.
Wow. The fact that this patent was even granted tells me we have morons in the patent offices or that there is serious corruption going on.
If patent is invalid the way to prove that is to challenge that in court.
That system, that makes filling patents easy, is a whole reason why patent trolls exists. But it’s not a fault of patent offices, that they’re mandated to work that way.
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#138The OP has a weirdly expansive/detailed Wikipedia page.
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's easy to argue that spending $1M on deterrence once is cheaper than paying each patent troll who asks $10k. It's also likely that this post is part of the defense strategy. If you were the patent troll, what would you do at this point - withdraw the claim and try again with an easier victim, or try to find out whether the "if this continues" part is true?
"If you were the patent troll, what would you do at this point ?" If I could get the trial moved to a jurisdiction where I'm friends with a judge, which I recall was part of the strategy, I'd keep trolling. While geohot gets love on a hacker forum like HN, most courts (and people in general) as far as I can tell just assume guilt.
(Source: Worked as a litigator for 7 years.)
Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit
#140There needs to be an anti-patent-troll membership organization. You pay a fee relative to some metric and the organization acts as insurance against parent trolls by fully defending any patent lawsuits that are obviously unjustified. And to keep costs low, membership in this organization would be public to deter patent trolls from even trying to sue a member in the first place.