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

Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 117 posts

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#61

Post by moocowduckquack »

dctoedt wrote: post #8
geuis wrote: post #5

Why hasn't anyone addressed the probable criminal activity going on with these handful of judges in this one district of Texas? Just because someone has the title "judge" doesn't give them untouchable super powers. There's a giant reek of illegality coming from that area and someone needs to look under the covers. My hypothesis is there's a payoff racket going on. There's a multi level system setup with a few insider…

> Why hasn't anyone addressed the probable criminal activity going on with these handful of judges in this one district of Texas? ... My hypothesis is there's a payoff racket going on. There's a multi level system setup with a few insiders who know how to pay off the local judges to dismiss certain cases. Careful there. Unless you've got more than a hypothesis, what you're saying borders on the libelous. (Not that a…

Surely the words "probable" and "hypothesis" are what means it is almost definitely not libellous. A hypothesis is the start of reason, not the conclusion of it. To state a hypothesis is to admit to a suspicion that something is possible, not to state something to be true.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#62

Post by Iftheshoefits »

How are any of these patents valid, especially in application to mobile application technology? I'm not a lawyer; I'm seriously baffled as to how any of them, in application to mobile "pay to upgrade" (or any other "customer interaction") flows, aren't obvious. It's the first thing I thought of when I first thought to write a mobile application and how to make money off of it.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#63

Post by javajosh »

randomfool wrote: post #41
javajosh wrote: post #28

The threat that Lodsys represents to anyone doing technology is so large that it would seem to make sense to band together. I'm thinking along the lines of creating a "Patent Defense Cooperative" where members pay a certain amount every month for the three purposes of a) patent lawsuit insurance, b) to fund lobbying efforts to reform the patent system, and c) scrutinize a judicial apparatus that seems biased in favor…

Sweet- so Apple can join this and infringe on anyone's patents and get their legal bills paid for? Seriously though, it would have to have some clear definition of patent troll. It would be interesting to have some sort of insurance- say $5million to be spent in case of patent lawsuit. Make a clear public statement- we will never settle and WILL spend $5m in case of a lawsuit. Would make it very counter-productive fo…

You are right. Luckily there is a fairly well known, small list of patent trolls (the people mind you, not the meaningless shell companies) that could be simply enumerated, with the charter of the cooperative allowing additions (but never removals). I mean, I'd pay $20/mo for Lodsys protection alone.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#64

Post by geuis »

efa wrote: post #53
geuis wrote: post #5

Why hasn't anyone addressed the probable criminal activity going on with these handful of judges in this one district of Texas? Just because someone has the title "judge" doesn't give them untouchable super powers. There's a giant reek of illegality coming from that area and someone needs to look under the covers. My hypothesis is there's a payoff racket going on. There's a multi level system setup with a few insider…

Just because you lived in Texas doesn't give you a pass in saying such a hateful thing. This is the most ignorant thing I've seen on HN in a long time.

You're partly right. I'm not particularly happy that a) I expressed myself this way and b) its the top voted comment on this article. There's a deeper message that I was trying to get across but this came out pretty badly.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#65

Post by rayiner »

clavalle wrote: post #57
geuis wrote: post #5

Why hasn't anyone addressed the probable criminal activity going on with these handful of judges in this one district of Texas? Just because someone has the title "judge" doesn't give them untouchable super powers. There's a giant reek of illegality coming from that area and someone needs to look under the covers. My hypothesis is there's a payoff racket going on. There's a multi level system setup with a few insider…

I don't think it is as clear cut as flat out bribery but these judges know what side their bread is buttered. They live there. They are friends with hotel and restaurant owners. Their family members are local patent attorneys. They have relatives that own 'commercial office buildings' that are nothing more than empty offices for a convenient mailing address for shell companies. If they started looking less friendly t…

These are federal judges. They have life tenure. Fewer patent cases just means more time for golf.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#66

Post by moocowduckquack »

dctoedt wrote: post #23
mistercow wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't terms like "probable" and "my hypothesis" pretty obviously make this a statement of opinion, and therefore immune to libel claims?

> Don't terms like "probable" and "my hypothesis" pretty obviously make this a statement of opinion, and therefore immune to libel claims? Quite possibly. But who wants to spend the legal fees to test that? Pragmatically, it's better to stay reasonably far away from the edge of that particular cliff, lest one be propelled over the edge by a random gust of wind (or a well-placed push).

You sound like a rubbish lawyer if that is really your attitude towards it.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#67

Post by giardini »

geuis wrote: post #5

Why hasn't anyone addressed the probable criminal activity going on with these handful of judges in this one district of Texas? Just because someone has the title "judge" doesn't give them untouchable super powers. There's a giant reek of illegality coming from that area and someone needs to look under the covers. My hypothesis is there's a payoff racket going on. There's a multi level system setup with a few insider…

Please do not make angry and spiteful accusations without presenting any supporting evidence whatsoever. If you have evidence then please present it either here or to the proper authorities.

You should be more careful about what you say.

I am surprised that HN doesn't mark these posts down. Less foolish statements have been censured by the powers that be on this forum.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#68

Post by moocowduckquack »

dctoedt wrote: post #51
mistercow wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a healthy attitude, especially when we're talking about the possibility of corruption. If we all take that "pragmatic" view, what will actually prevent corruption?

> If we all take that "pragmatic" view, what will actually prevent corruption? Journalists. They know that you avoid libel by stating facts supported by evidence. Truth is a defense to a libel charge (at least in the U.S.). And as mentioned above, when the libel plaintiff is a "public figure," a higher standard applies, precisely because of the public interest in ferreting out corruption and the like.

So give some indication of how they would in any way be able to show malice in this case, let alone a defamatory statement.

Re: Judge tosses Apple motion, allows patent troll Lodsys to continue rampage

#70

Post by jlgreco »

benologist wrote: post #55
geuis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, I'm not attacking you personally. Just to be clear about that. Your response was just a good example of the kinds of tactics guilty parties use sometimes by trying to silence critics. Do you blog about your experiences? One thing I could stand to learn about more are the internals of patent litigation.

So far disagreeing with you = criminal activity, ignorance, small-mindedness, and what 'guilty' parties do to silence their critics. Alternatively, you might like to consider the possibility your opinions are simply not universal truths.

> So far disagreeing with you = [...] what 'guilty' parties do to silence their critics.

I don't think that is a fair assessment of the above claim.

The claim is that threats of libel suits are what guilty parties do to silence their critics, not disagreeing.

Post reply on HN