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

Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

blog.comma.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 318 posts

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#171

Post by White_Wolf »

hedora wrote: post #112

If I was carefully looking for prior art to invalidate the patent, I'd look at Verizon's patent portfolio: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hum_(system) Their Hum product seems to do exactly what the patent troll claims to own a patent on. It plugs into the OBD2 port and calls emergency services after a collision. Also, Nissan patented something very similar in 2004: US Patent for Vehicle emergency notification system…

There's a similar one from 1979 for an Automatic emergency call system for vehicles

https://patents.google.com/patent/DE2912547C2/en

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#172

Post by FPGAhacker »

mirzap wrote: post #166

I always admired George, his simplicity and vision. But after this I respect him even more: What he didn’t take into account is that comma isn’t run by rational actors in suits sitting on a committee. It’s run by me, George Hotz. I’m willing to lose $1M before I give him $10k. We will hire an amazing legal team, fight this, and while doing so invalidate his patents so they can’t be used against anyone else. Not becau…

“Right thing to do”, or, “punch back 10 times harder so the next troll thinks twice.”

Both work for me. When people trumpet their altruism, I usually don’t buy it.

I don’t really care about geohotz motivation though. Glad to see someone with the means standing up to the trolls.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#173

Post by zaarn »

linuxhansl wrote: post #45

In every western country - except the US and England - the loser pays for the cost of the trial (all parties' lawyer fees + the court). Just this reduces frivolous lawsuits. If you have a good case, sure, go ahead. If your case is weak, you run a real risk paying not only for your lawyers but the other side as well. (Note that there are disadvantages to loser-pays as well. Image you legitimately want to sue corporati…

It should be noted that atleast in Germany, you can't just run up the lawyer bills. There are standard rates and you only pay "necessary costs". That means one lawyer. At standard rate. And only for what they did in the court room. That means what you pay the other side in legal costs is usually less than what you paid your lawyer. Though you pay other fees too and in total IIRC it usually amounts to about 150-200% of what you paid your lawyer after everything is said and done. If you are low income, the state can pay both lawyer fees, in fact, you can always request the state pay your lawyer, that's how we run the right to a lawyer to defend yourself (the state does not assign you one, you have to get one yourself).

This is entirely done so that the costs of a court case don't ruin someone's life forever. IIRC if you are low income, running a lengthy court proceeding won't be more expensive than a single lawyer in terms of the legal costs the court has you carry if you end up loosing. And even that depends because it's somewhat in the court to decide that, because we don't want to make people feel like they shouldn't sue for legitimate reasons.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#174

Post by prvit »

slimsag wrote: post #155
prvit wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no chance he would’ve ended up with any of the things you mention.

I don't know? Gary Bowser (canadian citizen) was deported to the US due to lawsuit and sentenced to 40 months in prison recently. "Conspiracy to Circumvent Technological Measures and to Traffic in Circumvention Devices", and "Trafficking in Circumvention Devices" were two charges

You could of course look at the facts of the case and understand why.

He was, in fact, selling circumvention devices for the explicit purpose of enabling piracy.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#175

Post by tiernano »

8ytecoder wrote: post #153
gregsadetsky wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really good idea to bring it to yc - they know how much legal fights like these have cost across all of the cohorts. And obviously they would pitch it internally to all existing + future startups. Maybe this is what ends this garbage once and for all?

I think $10k/yr is fairly reasonable even for startups. However, a lot of these trolls go after small businesses, don’t they?

You could do different levels of protection. Have a smaller tier for smaller companies (less than a million revenue a year) for maybe 500 or 1000 a year, then larger companies pay a more. If you get one of these lawsuits, do what cloud flare have "I'm under attack" style join.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#177

Post by alecco »

ummonk wrote: post #90

There 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.

Most large corporations have a huge chest of patents they use to keep incumbents out. Their lobbyists would never allow a change to the current status quo.

Lobbying should be banned. Fix the root of the problem.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#178

Post by missedthecue »

headsoup wrote: post #140
ummonk wrote: post #90

There 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.

No, they need to fix the systemic issues that allow patent trolls to succeed.

It's easier to unilaterally start up a membership org than it is to unilaterally reform US federal patent law in a fundamental way.

Re: Patent Trolls Inbound: Our First Lawsuit

#180

Post by sjamaan »

linuxhansl wrote: post #45

In every western country - except the US and England - the loser pays for the cost of the trial (all parties' lawyer fees + the court). Just this reduces frivolous lawsuits. If you have a good case, sure, go ahead. If your case is weak, you run a real risk paying not only for your lawyers but the other side as well. (Note that there are disadvantages to loser-pays as well. Image you legitimately want to sue corporati…

I don't understand how this is not enough to deter patent trolls. Aren't they afraid companies (who tend to have deeper pockets than individuals anyway) will just fight the law suit and, y'know, win?
Post reply on HN