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

Don't mess with Newegg

blog.newegg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 200 posts

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#171

Post by the_watcher »

icpmacdo wrote: post #58
the_watcher wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adam Carolla is spearheading a group of the top podcasts in the world doing exactly this. I've donated, I know Carolla can rub people the wrong way, but he's the guy you want running something like this, since he'll spend a ton of his own money to prove his point. http://fundanything.com/patenttroll?locale=en

Carolla's opines are based in logic I have always found. I can not donate to his cause because I find it impossible to justify another countries broken legal system has to accept bribes to stop from destroying innovation.

What's your solution then? Complaining gets nothing done in the US unless it's backed with money.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#172

Post by bradleyjg »

mhandley wrote: post #138
bsder wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the troll companies are always shell companies with nothing but the patents. So, even if you win, the shell company will declare bankruptcy. This is what changed the game. Before, two big companies generally had enough patents that they would simply agree to cross license because they both infringed one another's patents. So, for the company being sued, it's a no win situation.

In one British case I was involved in, the troll's strategy was so obvious they were required to put up a bond to cover at least part of our side's legal fees if they lost. That's a pretty good way to reduce completely frivolous cases. They did eventually lose (we invalidated their patent). We were still out of pocket, but if their patent had been even weaker, I think they'd have backed out when they had to post the…

The difference is that under the English rule there's a presumption that the loser pays the winner's legal costs, while under the American rule the presumption is that each side bears their own costs. In a few areas of law, Congress has by statute adopted the English rule, and in those areas it is common for courts to insist on posting a bond, but in places where the American rule is in place it is very uncommon to do so.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#173

Post by chris_mahan »

bsder wrote: post #21
mixmax wrote: post #14

It seems to me that the legal system in the US is largely broken, and that just about anyone can be sued if only you find the right grounds. Being sued and defending yourself is enormously expensive which is what patent trolls exploit. Why not use this offensively against patent trolls? Find all sorts of ways to take them to court, the American legal seems to have plenty of opportunities in that regard. There are som…

And the troll companies are always shell companies with nothing but the patents. So, even if you win, the shell company will declare bankruptcy. This is what changed the game. Before, two big companies generally had enough patents that they would simply agree to cross license because they both infringed one another's patents. So, for the company being sued, it's a no win situation.

If the patent portfolio of these companies that go bankrupt sold at auction to satisfy creditors? Who buys these, other patent-trolls?

That might be a problem right there.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#174

Post by aragot »

weland wrote: post #104
bsder wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the troll companies are always shell companies with nothing but the patents. So, even if you win, the shell company will declare bankruptcy. This is what changed the game. Before, two big companies generally had enough patents that they would simply agree to cross license because they both infringed one another's patents. So, for the company being sued, it's a no win situation.

IMHO, this should not be dealt with at a company level, since the shell company is arguably not engaged in any economic activity: their juridical entity is, essentially, worthless. Instead, given the toxic economic climate the people behind it create, this should be transported into criminal charges brought against the make-believe CEOs behind the shell companies that specifically engage in patent trolling. They're a…

Moreover, patent lawsuits have a high probability of engaging a single programmer's responsibility, since all contracts engage the programmer not to use derivative works of anything else and not to use patented work. So I would think it's only fair if the counter penalty were directed at the CEO in person instead of the patent troll.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#175

Post by tim333 »

rbanffy wrote: post #40

Is there a "Patent Troll Response Command" to coordinate the response of companies being sued and to facilitate the creation of groups to fight such lawsuits together?

I was thinking that - or is there a site where you can post your troll letter and be put in touch with the other companies that have received the same one? Wouldn't be that hard to build. Does anyone know if there is one?

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#176

Post by rayiner »

taude wrote: post #127
mixmax wrote: post #14

It seems to me that the legal system in the US is largely broken, and that just about anyone can be sued if only you find the right grounds. Being sued and defending yourself is enormously expensive which is what patent trolls exploit. Why not use this offensively against patent trolls? Find all sorts of ways to take them to court, the American legal seems to have plenty of opportunities in that regard. There are som…

It's weird that 40-45% of Congress is attorneys.

It's about 26%: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/first-thing-we-.... Banking and business is catching up, though, at about 20%.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#177

Post by revmoo »

Hey Newegg,

Why the hell do you continue to scam your customers on this item:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182...

It has been listed for over a month as having a 7-year warranty and despite my repeated phone calls you continue to scam your customers. I'm stuck reaching out on social media at this point to warn people about this shit.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#178

Post by ivanca »

mcherm wrote: post #130
weland wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO, this should not be dealt with at a company level, since the shell company is arguably not engaged in any economic activity: their juridical entity is, essentially, worthless. Instead, given the toxic economic climate the people behind it create, this should be transported into criminal charges brought against the make-believe CEOs behind the shell companies that specifically engage in patent trolling. They're a…

> this should be transported into criminal charges brought against the make-believe CEOs behind the shell companies Ah, but the original proposal was for individuals to file lawsuits. Individuals cannot press criminal charges -- only the state (in the form of the prosecutor's office) can do that. And the state can not (and SHOULD NOT) use that power to go after individuals because we don't like those people, or becau…

Working as a lawyer for an extortionist company of this sort does makes you an extortionist. And this is how it works many times, otherwise hitmen could just claim that they were only doing their work for a company.

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#179

Post by ubernostrum »

shawnreilly wrote: post #101
mixmax wrote: post #14

It seems to me that the legal system in the US is largely broken, and that just about anyone can be sued if only you find the right grounds. Being sued and defending yourself is enormously expensive which is what patent trolls exploit. Why not use this offensively against patent trolls? Find all sorts of ways to take them to court, the American legal seems to have plenty of opportunities in that regard. There are som…

At the last Startup Weekend Honolulu 2014, I introduced my approach towards solving this problem; The Open Patent Foundation (Non-Profit). Similar to concepts such as Creative Commons, and Open Source Software Licenses, the idea is to create Open Patent License(s) that standardize a method to share intellectual property with the Community. While this does not directly solve the problem, I think it is a necessary firs…

Cross-licensing and other "we won't sue you if you don't sue us" foundations get created at the rate of about one a year.

If the previous iterations all failed to do anything meaningful, why do you believe that starting yet another iteration will do something meaningful?

Re: Don't mess with Newegg

#180

Post by a_c_s »

dagw wrote: post #116
jacquesm wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a shell company does not own the patent how can they (as a licensee) sue for infringement?

The parent company simply writes that into the license. Companies like Intellectual Ventures set up a shell company and give that company a time limited exclusive right to some patents, including the right to sue other companies for infringement, during that time period. In exchange for this exclusive license the shell company agrees to pay, let's say, 95% of any revenue generated by sub-licensing or court settlement…

Could the company being sued start playing the same game? As soon one is sued by a troll, reconfigure the 'offending' bit into an asset-less shell company that you purchase/license/etc. things from.
Post reply on HN