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

How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–138 of 138 posts

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#131

Post by queensnake »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #87
mark-r wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great idea, but the lawyers would shoot it down immediately (if they haven't already). The terms of a settlement would just have a clause preventing them from offering such a bounty.

So just do it ahead of time. As soon as the troll approaches you, before you so much as sign an NDA, immediately set up an independent trust with the money in it which will give it to whoever invalidates the troll's patents, and if the patents expire without being invalidated the money plus interest goes back to the company. Do this immediately, for every troll, by every company. It could put a pretty good sized dent…

.. so then as part of the settlement, the trolls says 'and withdraw your bounty'. Same thing.

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#132

Post by AnthonyMouse »

queensnake wrote: post #131
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So just do it ahead of time. As soon as the troll approaches you, before you so much as sign an NDA, immediately set up an independent trust with the money in it which will give it to whoever invalidates the troll's patents, and if the patents expire without being invalidated the money plus interest goes back to the company. Do this immediately, for every troll, by every company. It could put a pretty good sized dent…

.. so then as part of the settlement, the trolls says 'and withdraw your bounty'. Same thing.

Hence the words "trust" and "independent" -- you set it up so that it's totally out of your control. Then you can't withdraw it any more than you could prohibit the EFF from doing the same thing if they chose to.

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#133

Post by pjscott »

saalweachter wrote: post #119
caseysoftware wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Go Big or Go Home" is all well and good when you're the only person.. but I think you're right. Once there are a few or dozens or hundreds of people involved, hopefully it changes the decision making process.

If your principles aren't worth your friends and family starving, what are they worth?

Potentially, they can still be worth quite a lot. Starvation is serious business.

(You might have been facetious, but I'm not sure, so I'll just take it literally.)

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#134

Post by pjscott »

lubujackson wrote: post #64
alex_c wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this long-term view is, I suspect, how NewEgg justifies the short-term risk of losing a trial. Never negotiate with terrorists.

SOYLENT TERRORISM IS CORPORATE PEOPLE!

If you think "Don't negotiate with terrorists" is just overdramatizing, then you've misread. It's actually a reference to an interesting bit of theory about deterrence. A country which has a history of negotiating with terrorists will tend to get more terrorists making demands of them. Conversely, a country which steadfastly refuses to ever negotiate, even when this hurts them, will not get as many terrorist demands.

This kind of reasoning also applies to border skirmishes, contract disputes, and patent trolls.

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#135

Post by rhizome »

sirmarksalot wrote: post #127
gabemart wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This seems true enough - from a (rational) game-theoretic perspective, > why should any victim really fight hard to overcome a troll, if in > doing so they risk big losses, and don't gain any advantage over their > competition even if they win? If prices were at a near-optimal level to begin with and then are raised across-the-board by some external factor, each firm may retain the same slice of the pie they had be…

That sounds like the definition of a public good. It costs money to create the good (defeat the troll), but once the good is created, there's no way to control access to it (once the patent is invalidated, anyone can use it). A rational actor always wants to be the one who didn't pay to create the good, so only a benevolent, irrational third party will ever create it. The problem with a pact as you describe it is tha…

I think there's something to be said for differentiation being borne of irrationality. Apple's market priorities, for example. Is there a concept of passive players constituting the majority of the beneficiaries of public goods, i.e. parasites?

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#136

Post by rhizome »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #87
mark-r wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great idea, but the lawyers would shoot it down immediately (if they haven't already). The terms of a settlement would just have a clause preventing them from offering such a bounty.

So just do it ahead of time. As soon as the troll approaches you, before you so much as sign an NDA, immediately set up an independent trust with the money in it which will give it to whoever invalidates the troll's patents, and if the patents expire without being invalidated the money plus interest goes back to the company. Do this immediately, for every troll, by every company. It could put a pretty good sized dent…

Every C&D can be posted to a Kickstarter-like site, which collects for the pool of funds. Other companies who receive the same C&D can join the group, basically creating a class-action in advance of the civil action being filed. Potential trolls could look at their prospects and make decisions thereby in a form of mutually-assured destruction (patents on the trolls part, the funds on the receiver's parts).

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#137

Post by nfriedly »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #46
NoPiece wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Next time you buy something, and have a choice between Newegg who fought and put themselves at risk, and Amazon who took the easy way out, you know who deserves your money.

Yep. I quit ordering from Newegg years ago because of a customer service issue. We order an unholy pile of stuff from Amazon all the time. I think it's time to start ordering from Newegg again.

I'm in about the same boat, only it's been more like 3-4 years. Newegg is about to get more business from me.

Re: How Newegg crushed the “shopping cart” patent and saved online retail

#138

Post by sounds »

caseysoftware wrote: post #115
hessenwolf wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds nice, but I am sure there would be some employees floating around with families and mortgages and bills that work hard and honestly, that you might feel a bit beholden to, no?

"Go Big or Go Home" is all well and good when you're the only person.. but I think you're right. Once there are a few or dozens or hundreds of people involved, hopefully it changes the decision making process.

So you would argue Newegg should have folded to the patent trolls?

I'm not saying that's your stance, but I wouldn't worry about my employees' future without my company as much, since I am worrying about my employees' future in a world dominated by rent-seeking behaviors like patent trolls.

Maybe my employees see the world like I do. Maybe they don't. I can't wait for 100% unanimous approval before making decisions. I certainly plan to try and help them if I destroy the company that was paying them, but that's entirely up to me.

Post reply on HN