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

Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

rackspace.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 143 posts

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#61

Post by Avenger42 »

Ilmesnkie_Jones wrote: post #45
chime wrote: post #5

If IPR for screen-rotation ends up with nullifying the patent, can organizations like EFF start doing that pro-actively for other ridiculous patents like One-Click-Buy and Swipe-to-Unlock? Or does the patent-holder have to be proven as a troll?

The patent holder would have to sue someone first or there would be no standing to bring a case.

On that point, how does the patent holder typically learn of cases of infringement? Would it be as simple as a surreptitious email? Or do you need something like a writeup in a publication, so they will see you as a potential goldmine?

I'm wondering what it would take to force a fight on crap patents - create something that infringes on a patent, contact the NPE through some untraceable channel to inform them, then await the lawsuit (or "licensing offer").

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#62

Post by larrys »

lukifer wrote: post #29

I've been thinking about the connection between biological signaling and advertising; like colored plumage or a large chest cavity, a multi-million ad campaign is a hard-to-fake signal, and in a way, such campaigns are as much about overt displays of power than the contents of the ad. In that sense, this move is the pinnacle of the best form of advertising. Whether they are acting out of pure altruism or pure strateg…

"thereby earning genuine trust with current and prospective customers"

I don't disagree with that in general but I will raise the issue that you would need to know the percentage of current and future customers that really care about things like this to know the effect that it will have on their business in dollars.

Consumers and business are fickle. Good will has a value but people will drop you in a dime if the next shiny ball comes along with a better product and/or lower pricing. My guess is that the community that cares about this relative to their sales volume is not as significant as your statement suggests.

As an similar example, people on HN regularly hate on godaddy but they are still a giant in the domain business and end users that use them (I deal with those end users since gd is a competitor of ours) don't care about any of the shenanigans. And the "tech guys" that feed business to gd in general seem to be pretty happy with the relationship judging by transfer rates.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#63

Post by umsm »

drakaal wrote: post #23
Arjuna wrote: post #6

On the topic, this is quite an interesting TED talk given by Drew Curtis. "You need to know that the average patent troll defense costs $2M and takes 18 months... when you win." Drew Curtis: How I Beat a Patent Troll https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_lb3D7Ay-M

Drew is exaggeration. I took on Acacia, it cost me nothing more than the travel, and time away from my primary business. Lawyers cost a lot of money, but for something like "the ability to rotate a mobile screen" that rackspace is fighting you don't need a lawyer. Prior art exists for rotating screens on desktops and tablet PCs. Feature parity on Mobile is not innovative. Obviousness is the challenge to a patent and…

I believe the keyword here is "average". There are probably examples of cases on both ends of the spectrum: cases that dragged on to be very expensive and others that were resolved with a phone call or letter.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#64

Post by charlesjshort »

I've worked as a patent prosecutor for a top ranked patent prosecution firm; and I know first hand that most patents are 'pencil patents' worthless subtle distinctions that are allowed because 'obvious' arguments do not stand up.

However, some innovations, maybe 1 in 1000, are really worthy. And if the inventor did not have some way to protect their research - google or microsoft or anyone else could usurp the idea from the average joe who spent a lot of research and effort to resolve the invention. just my 2 cents.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#65

Post by takluyver »

lukifer wrote: post #29

I've been thinking about the connection between biological signaling and advertising; like colored plumage or a large chest cavity, a multi-million ad campaign is a hard-to-fake signal, and in a way, such campaigns are as much about overt displays of power than the contents of the ad. In that sense, this move is the pinnacle of the best form of advertising. Whether they are acting out of pure altruism or pure strateg…

Actually, there's another similarity to biology. This also advertises to any other patent trolls thinking of suing them 'We are willing and able to fight back'. So patent trolls will pick on some other company that's more likely to pay up.

Some species of antelope, when pursued by a predator, will suddenly leap high into the air, jumping from all four feet at once. This is called stotting, and the best theory for why they do it is to signal to the predator: 'look, I can afford to waste energy doing this while you're chasing me; better focus on something a bit slower and weaker'.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#66

Post by ScottBurson »

toasterlovin wrote: post #52
spartango wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It totally depends on the field. In software, perhaps this would work nicely, because rapid iteration and expansion prevails. That said, in the pharmaceutical or material science worlds, the cost and pace of research require that protection be afforded to those who choose to invest and disclose the fruits of their labor to the world. It's not so black and white that there are no incentives for disclosed innovation, b…

There was plenty of invention before patents existed as a legal concept. Patents exist because some people who came up with clever ideas thought (properly) that it was in their best interest to be granted a legal monopoly on the implementation of their ideas and lobbied lawmakers to grant them these monopolies. Patents did not come into being because we, as a society (speaking as an American), determined that our pac…

Have you researched the history of patents? I'm no expert, but my understanding is that they were established in response to the guild system, in which a lot of technical knowledge was kept secret. Invention may have been occurring, but it didn't benefit the larger society the way it could have.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#67

Post by escaped_hn »

coolj wrote: post #44
escaped_hn wrote: post #17

Coming from the company that put a "TM" after every mention of the generic word "Cloud Server" on their website.

A trademark is different from a software patent. A trademark addresses specific product branding in a specific market; a software patent -- at least the ones in question -- address a generic process that's not limited to a specific market. Consider the trademark on the Wikipedia name versus a (hypothetical) software patent on "a method for storing and displaying user-generated content."

Ok. If i want to start a cloud server company, can i use the generic word Cloud Server? if i do, will Rackspace sue me? Even if they are different things, seems like they reach the same outcome.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#68

Post by habitue »

tomp wrote: post #28
a_p wrote: post #22

If you cannot understand how people could possible think that software patents are acceptable, I recommend reading this article. [1] Not because it will convince you that software patents are good — it won't. But it will help you understand the thought process of lawyers who do think that there should be some software patents. For example, Goetz writes that he supports "patents where the preferred implementation of a…

Personally, I support software patents. I'm just against idea patents, as opposed to invention patents. Screen rotation is no invention. It's an idea; once you have it, it's trivial to implement. That, IMO, does not afford patent protection. However, certain things can, and should be patents. RSA, for example. It's a non-trivial procedure that was non-trivial to invent and there are not very many alternatives.

That's exactly the issue. Anything that qualifies as not an "idea" patent, like you're using the term, would be an algorithm, which are not patentable. The only thing software patents cover are "idea patents".

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#69

Post by joshaidan »

This sounds like it could be a good PR move for Rackspace. I've heard from quite a few developers who, for whatever reason, have a negative opinion of Rackspace. Does this action change your opinion of them?

But perhaps it ultimate comes down to their service, the products they offer, and price.

Re: Abolish The Patent, Vanquish The Troll

#70

Post by cwp »

mark212 wrote: post #60
lukifer wrote: post #29

I've been thinking about the connection between biological signaling and advertising; like colored plumage or a large chest cavity, a multi-million ad campaign is a hard-to-fake signal, and in a way, such campaigns are as much about overt displays of power than the contents of the ad. In that sense, this move is the pinnacle of the best form of advertising. Whether they are acting out of pure altruism or pure strateg…

the signalling isn't primarily to current and prospective customers, it's to other trolls out there. The $75k (negotiable) offer of compromise is on the low end of such demands and the signal to other NPEs thinking about suing Rackspace is Be Prepared for War. That customers think this is a good thing and burnishes Rackspace's reputation for being on the side of developers, etc. is a nice bonus.

Exactly. And further, if you go to war with us and lose, it'll cost you, because we'll go after your patents.
Post reply on HN