I propose a fun and existing amendment to intellectual property cases: if the plaintiff loses, the defendant gets to shoot the plaintiff (or the plaintiff's CEO) and the losing legal team. Not at a distant time and place, mind you, but right there on the spot. "We the jury find the defendant not liable blam blam ." I think that should reduce the number of patent lawsuits to approximately the number appropriate for an…
Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
91–100 of 137 posts
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#92This is pretty fucked up. So now anyone in the world can expect to be sued in the US on base of US software patents? How do you release anything in a situation like this. Then there is the burden of going to a court in Texas? How in the fuck they expect that a Swedish company hires lawyers in Texas? Just how much would that cost? Also this is going to beyond any sanity. Practically you have to stick to some common "p…
It's because Mojang sells stuff in the US via their website. I also assume Mojang could just completely ignore it if they have no assets in America, although I guess they'd be a risk of having minecraft.net seized as .net's US administered isn't it?
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can stop the distribution in the United Stares. In addition, Swedish courts would probably honor the decision of the US court.
Stop distribution? With what, magic? Hasn't everyone learned by now that you can't stop distribution of digital data?
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fuck? Replace 'intellectual property' with 'whistleblower' and you've suddenly illustrated exactly the terrible climate that scares a lot of people away from doing the right thing. The problem isn't overzealousness. Hell, overzealousness should be commended. The problem is a system which drains time and resources regardless and outcome, and a general ignorance due to the complexity of technology & prior art.
We want overzealous IP litigation? To the contrary: yes, that is exactly the problem.
Obviously, that latter is not true, and that's the issue here.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because Mojang sells stuff in the US via their website. I also assume Mojang could just completely ignore it if they have no assets in America, although I guess they'd be a risk of having minecraft.net seized as .net's US administered isn't it?
So their alternative is to close shop in the US? I like that thought. This might actually be the best action to improve the US patent system.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#96I propose a fun and existing amendment to intellectual property cases: if the plaintiff loses, the defendant gets to shoot the plaintiff (or the plaintiff's CEO) and the losing legal team. Not at a distant time and place, mind you, but right there on the spot. "We the jury find the defendant not liable blam blam ." I think that should reduce the number of patent lawsuits to approximately the number appropriate for an…
How about a more realistic thought (the humor in your post has been noted), how about if when you lose a patent case as the plaintiff, you (or your company) are no longer allowed to file patents in the future, and your existing patents are now invalid.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
The U.S. specifically forbids debtor's prison. You cannot be thrown in jail simply for owing money to someone. European countries copied this right from the U.S. when they got around to modernizing their legal systems.
Not American, but can't you be jailed for contempt of court? http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jailed-for--280--the-return-of... http://farquharlaw.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/debtors-prison-e...
In the Yahoo Article, the woman arrested failed to show up to multiple court hearings, despite receive notice at the proper address. The fact that the court hearings related to a debt was incidental. Blame shoddy journalism.
The second one, is a blog post, which actually talks about something entirely different from a debtor's prison. It refers to a "debtor's exam", which is a fancy way of saying that your finances are examined to see if you can afford to pay the debt. No prison time involved. Intrusive maybe, but warranted if you haven't paid the debt at issue.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
The U.S. has jurisdiction over ICANN and thus over all TLD's that are not country TLDs (i.e., .co, .tv, .ly, etc.). But jurisdiction extends only to the domain itself, not to the company, unless you are doing business in the U.S., in which case you are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. to the extent of your business contacts. Transferring your U.S. assets will probably not spare you, as jurisdiction is establis…
Thanks for all your comments on this page, they're very illuminating. I understand why a lawsuit could target the American LLC, but even if I dissolve it or let it go under, why wouldn't I and my assets still be protected? I understand that once I switch to the foreign LLC I'd have to avoid any business ties to the U.S. (i.e. move my hosting overseas). I assume that I'd still have subscribers to my service in the U.S…
For example, if your LLC is being sued for...say, slander, that supposedly occurred 6 months ago, and your LLC were conducting business in the U.S. 6 months ago, your LLC would be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts based upon your past contacts. (Otherwise, businesses would just leave the country to avoid jurisdiction.) On the other hand, if you are currently in the U.S., but were not in the U.S. 6 months ago, you are still subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts based on your current contact with the U.S.
Again, your personal assets would be protected. However, the LLC's assets would not be protected. Once you've been targeted by a lawsuit, there's no point in moving the LLC's assets overseas. If anything, you're more likely to have an enforceable court order freezing the LLC's assets in whatever jurisdiction you've moved to.
I assume that I'd still have subscribers to my service in the U.S., but it doesn't make sense to me that that would constitute doing business there. By that rationale wouldn't every internet company be subject to the jurisdiction of every country on Earth? Accepting and continuing to do business with the U.S. subscribers constitutes doing business in the U.S. Under most double taxation (prevention) treaties, a software/online "service" is deemed performed where the customer uses the service, unless there is a significant human element to the service in which case the service is deemed performed where that particular human performs his tasks.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even I would like an expert to answer this. Assuming my domain is a .com domain, does the USA have jurisdiction over the company even if say, it's registered in Sweden?
I'd also like to hear an expert's opinion, but isn't the entire point of a limited liability company to limit liability?
Lets say I install plumbing in your house and it fails and damages your property, so you sue my company. If I'm a sole proprietor or a couple of guys doing business as a partnership then suing the company effectively means suing me (us) personally. If I lose and owe you $1 million, you can have my plumbing stuff seized to pay the debt, but if that doesn't cover all of it then I personally owe you the remainder. You can put a lein on my house and screw up my credit and put a collection agency after me until I pay off the debt.
On the other hand, if I have an LLC or a corporation, then the liability is limited to the property of the LLC or corporation. You can have my vans and warehouse seized, but you can't take my personal property like my house. If the LLC can't pay the full debt then it can owe you and make payments or something, but you can't "ruin" the owners.
In this case, simply "dissolving" the LLC wouldn't solve the problem. While it existed the LLC presumably had property, and that's what they would go after. If you tried to pull a "The LLC didn't have any property" then they'd probably toss you to the IRS for running an illegitimate LLC. And when the IRS was done auditing you, the patent guys would come back and go after you personally.
I'm definitely not a lawyer or any kind of business expert, though. If anybody knows better I'd also be interested.
Re: Mojang, makers of Minecraft, sued by patent troll
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you take it a lot more seriously?
Because the decision has flip-flopped a few times, but at the moment Microsoft has settled. ( http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-05/microsoft-settles-f... ) MS has lawyers, and money, and time, and thus for them to lose is concerning. (Not saying anything about the applicability of this patent to Mojang.)