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

Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 426 posts

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#221

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

notfed wrote: post #155
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domain names pay per year because there's an ongoing service attached. There's no such thing for patent (besides fee to file) Why punish patent holders because of patent trolls or garbage patents ? Make it unprofitable to be a troll, and they will go away. Trolls need to be tagged , like pirates. There should be rules to make hunting for trolls profitable. For that, you need a "bounty". Here's my take: In any patent…

> Domain names pay per year because there's an ongoing service attached. There's no such thing for patent Erm, what service? A record in a database? How's that different from a patent office? I guess there's fancy registrar website...to do what...help me pay my recurring bill?

I don't think you are arguing in good faith.

OK fine want an ongoing patient fee ? Make it $9.99 per year just like a registrar, who gives you convenient ways to renew and pay fees from a working, modern site, and allow migration , with a few clicks.

Is that going to prevent trolls ? Unequivocally, no.

Parent was arguing for some ridiculous, unnecessary , tax. Then cited registrars as an example.

My point, 1 gives a service, one does not. If you want to charge for a service, then make it transparent and make the fee reflect the service, not argue "hey we already charge for registrars" to make his/her point about a new, unecessary tax.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#222

Post by brlewis »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #204
empath-nirvana wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a defensive patent portfolio. They use it to counter sue if a competitor sues them.

Edit: Removed a bone-headed hypothetical.

You lose a trademark if you don't defend it. I don't believe the same is true of patents.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#223

Post by kstrauser »

thelastgallon wrote: post #79
duped wrote: post #31

There needs to be a "use it or lose it" doctrine/law around technological IP. I get all the arguments around creating a market for the patent rights, but it just leads to these bottom feeders creating no value and increasing costs for the industry and consumers.

Patents are property and we need taxes/fee on it. $500/year per patent, will ensure use it (if you think it is valuable) or lose it. This is no different from domain names, most people pay $10 - $100/year just to keep a domain name. Some domain names are used, most aren't. These taxes can fund free education or healthcare or defense.

I offer as an alternative:

IP is property, and it's taxed at the value you declare that it's worth.

However, if you swear to the IRS that it's worth $500/yr, then you can't claim in court that a violation of it is costing you $10,000,000/yr in losses. That would be perjury.

Your patent is worth $10,000,000? Awesome! I bet your local school district will love to hear how much you'll be paying in taxes on it.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#224

Post by thfuran »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #186
thfuran wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're proposing that the state pay a good wage to anyone who chooses to be a full time inventor, regardless of the results? Does that include paying for whatever facilities might be required?

Who said anything about the state? All of these things are already paid for. Either that continues to happen, or invention just stops happening altogether. Obviously there is profit to be made from new ideas, so there should be plenty of incentive to invest in inventors. Inventors could also collaborate and unionize. Many already do.

>Who said anything about the state?

By implication, you:

>here is my proposal to replace intellectual property

Property rights, intellectual or otherwise, are granted and enforced by the state. So too, it would seem, might be their replacements. But it sounds like you're actually proposing simply eliminating all current IP law rather than replacing it with anything.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#225

Post by willsmith72 »

awesomeMilou wrote: post #214
mike_d wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The owner of the patent chooses the fee that they pay per year. And anyone can pay that fee * the remaining years on the patent * some multiplier (probably in the 2-10 range) to prematurely end the patent. So basically ending patents? If you invent something fantastic, say a way for a self driving car to perfectly sense its surroundings, Ford could just come in and pay whatever amount to invalidate your patent and…

> If you invent something fantastic, say a way for a self driving car to perfectly sense its surroundings That sounds like a highly constructed example, and even if we take it for bare value, makes a lot of assumptions, for example that whatever you invent is patentable. The way you phrase it also makes it sound like patents are all about individual contributions, when in reality the era of lone genius inventors is l…

Doesnt sounds constructed to me.

The "you" in that case could very easily be a startup

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#226

Post by toast0 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #204
empath-nirvana wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a defensive patent portfolio. They use it to counter sue if a competitor sues them.

Edit: Removed a bone-headed hypothetical.

> My understanding is a patent holder must defend their rights, if they are aware of the infringement, at the peril of losing them.

Pretty sure that's just for trademarks.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#227

Post by TeMPOraL »

petsfed wrote: post #211
victorbjorklund wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So someone inventing something for say mobile phones in the 80s that is still used would have estimated their patentent to not be so useful because the number of mobile phones wasnt that high. And if Apple violated their patent they would just pay pennies because of that? It is extremly hard to estimate the worth of a tech 30 years into the future invented today. Take a tech invented today and tell me what the market…

If you invented and patented something in the US in 1989, you'd have protections until 2009 at the latest. If it wasn't usable until 2013, then that sucks for you, but it is what it is. Your invention doesn't get 20 guaranteed years of profitability. You get 20 years to figure out how to make it profitable. The two are very different concepts. edit : this is why you don't patent every damned thing, just the things th…

> this is why you don't patent every damned thing, just the things that you believe will be profitable over the next 20 years

Unless you work for a corporation, that owns your intellectual output anyway, and encourages you to submit forms for anything that looks even remotely patentable.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#228

Post by cloogshicer »

Serious question: What if you run a small blog with a newsletter and some troll comes along and sues you - how do you defend yourself?

Even if the troll's claims are completely ridiculous, if you don't have a few $100k lying around for legal fees, you might not even have the option of going to trial. What do you do in such a case?

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#229

Post by jackblemming »

cloogshicer wrote: post #228

Serious question: What if you run a small blog with a newsletter and some troll comes along and sues you - how do you defend yourself? Even if the troll's claims are completely ridiculous, if you don't have a few $100k lying around for legal fees, you might not even have the option of going to trial. What do you do in such a case?

You bend the knee. The legal system exists to serve the rich.

Re: Cloudflare defeats patent troll Sable at trial

#230

Post by EnigmaFlare »

kstrauser wrote: post #223
thelastgallon wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patents are property and we need taxes/fee on it. $500/year per patent, will ensure use it (if you think it is valuable) or lose it. This is no different from domain names, most people pay $10 - $100/year just to keep a domain name. Some domain names are used, most aren't. These taxes can fund free education or healthcare or defense.

I offer as an alternative: IP is property, and it's taxed at the value you declare that it's worth. However, if you swear to the IRS that it's worth $500/yr, then you can't claim in court that a violation of it is costing you $10,000,000/yr in losses. That would be perjury. Your patent is worth $10,000,000? Awesome! I bet your local school district will love to hear how much you'll be paying in taxes on it.

But property usually isn't taxed. Trading is. If you license a patent to someone else for $500/year, you'd pay tax on that $500. But if it's actually worth more, of course you wouldn't charge such a low fee.
Post reply on HN