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

Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–219 of 219 posts

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#211

Post by hakfoo »

rocqua wrote: post #210
xahrepap wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think that Sawstop (in general. Might be some details that are bogus) is a great example of the patent system working as intended. The inventor reached out to several saw makers to license his new invention. None of them took it seriously. So he went and started a company with his new patent and became successful. Then other companies (Bosch specifically) tried to rip his tech off after they saw how effect…

From what I have heard, the sawstop 'inventor' is a patent attorney first, and an engineer second. Whilst he has offered to license the technology to other brands, reportedly the terms he offered were ridiculous. The bosch system was significantly different. Notably having the advantage of not destroying the blade when triggered. The sawstop patent removed this major innovation from the market. A clear example of sti…

I feel like mandatory licensing is the answer. Have a state ombudsman who sets a price of "marginally above reasonable" so that people are still encouraged to negotiate first, while providing a way out when it's obvious the patent-holder is not acting in good faith.

Everyone wins: the inventor gets a payday even if he can't deliver directly, consumers don't have to choose between "brand I trust" and "patent-exclusive feature I need", and manufacturers stay out of the courts.

You get the payday, whether it's your one man startup or a massive industrial that actually delivers the product to market.

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#212

Post by hakfoo »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #10
myshpa wrote: post #6

Why Software Patents are Bad, Period. https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0027 Patents are out of control, and they’re hurting innovation https://www.learnliberty.org/blog/patents-are-out-of-control... Economic and Game Theory Against Intellectual Monopoly https://web.archive.org/web/20120121014753/https://levine.ss... PATENTS AND INNOVATION IN ECONOMIC HISTORY https://gwern.net/doc/economics/2016-moser.pdf Historical rec…

I’m not sure radicalising this debate helps anyone. We are trying for a narrow victory of preserving IPR. Turning that into a broader argument about software patents plays into the opposition’s hands.

The goal of a narrow victory seems faulty. I wonder if a "narrow accelerationism" might be more effective.

IP disputes tend to be B or C stories in the public eye-- either super-technical where they only really interest people in very narrow verticals, or containing unsavoury and unmediagenic characters that are easy to demonize.

Give the IP lobby everything it wants, and we create a world of "here's an adorable 6-year-old girl who will die a very painful and public death because of patents" and "we had to burn down the pre-school because Mrs Crumble photocopied some worksheets with Donald Duck printed on them". With any luck, the backlash would be so massive that nobody would dare speak the word "patent" or "copyright" in Congress for three or four centuries.

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#214

Post by Slava_Propanei »

einpoklum wrote: post #93
pclmulqdq wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPRs are pretty useful for challenging bad patents and should be very broad. However, I found myself in favor of this change, and honestly questioning the EFF's motives given how strong and personal (speaking specifically to the EFF's ability to challenge patents, not a generic third party) your expressed opinions were in this piece. I am very sympathetic to the argument that Unified Patents and other folks who offer…

I've been convinced by your arguments about bad faith IPRs by for-profit entities! ... and therefore, I suggest the USPTO also prevent for-profits from filing patents.

[dead]

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#215

Post by thfuran »

TylerE wrote: post #175
thfuran wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term (in the US) wasn't originally that long. It was decided individually but not to exceed 14 years. That's long, but much more reasonable in a time when it could take months for just some basic roundtrip long-distance correspondence.

I don't think you can just state that in good faith while ignoring how much harder/more expensive R&D is these days.

Is it harder by an amount that exceeds the amount by which the readily addressable market has expanded for most things?

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#216

Post by musicale »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #109
joemullin wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware that there are allegedly "bad" IPRs including the OpenSky case. The alleged "extortion" here is that VLSI, a non-practicing entity, I believe backed by a hedge fund, would lose their 20-year government monopoly and no longer be able to seek billions of dollars in court. I have no idea who or what OpenSky is, and I don't weigh in on huge corporate cases like VLSI v. Intel where everyone has plenty of money f…

> But here's the value proposition: It's just not wrong to challenge a government subsidy or monopoly. Period. Especially on computer software and hardware, because they're often wrongly granted. I see where you're coming from, but I would suggest that this is pretty much an extremist point of view on intellectual property protections. It's easy to say that the online shopping cart is a dumb patent (because it is, an…

> By the way, VLSI is the remains of a real technology company that went out of business... because its IP was blatantly copied. They had no choice but to sell out to a patent troll.

I'd like to hear more about this. Wikipedia seems to say that VLSI Technology was an original investor in ARM Ltd. (which seems like it should have been worth something), was acquired by Philips in 1999, and continues to operate as part of Philips spinoff NXP Semiconductors.

Is this VLSI a different company?

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#217

Post by JoachimS »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #133
gregman1 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no software patents in EU (maybe even in the whole Europe) with exception for specially designed hardware. Idk how that works.

Here’s a thought experiment: take a look at the Tillitis Key: https://tillitis.se It’s a security dongle that can execute arbitrary programs. It’s hardware is actually a RISC-V core implemented on top of an FPGA, with some firmware on top to load the user programs. Now the firmware is a kind of software, so patent should not apply, right? Heck one could even argue that the configuration of the FPGA should not count e…

And you will be able to buy TKeys that are unlocked, and you (your organization) will then be able to personalize and lock them yourself. Does it then start out as SW, and then become hadrdware? Also not a lawyer. ;-)

https://shop.tillitis.se/

Re: Our right to challenge junk patents is under threat

#219

Post by czhutch »

Please go to US Inventor, https://www.usinventor.org & learn about Josh Malone (Bunch of Balloons) and what the PTAB is doing to legitimate inventors who's hard fought and paid for patents are getting 'nullified' by companies who just don't want to pay a reasonable licensing fee to use their invention. This is a very legitimate organization doing a lot on Capital Hill to help. They have a lot of info and encourage people to reach out to your Congressmen and Senators; loud voices everywhere sometimes break through.
Post reply on HN