There will be great irony if Apple complains about patent reform after this.
Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
31–40 of 127 posts
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#32I don't know if it's fair to call VirnetX a "patent troll." They're an NPE, but there's no indication that they're abusing the process or trying to get a low-ball settlement just to avoid actually going to court. Furthermore, the patents aren't just something they churned out. The technology in question was developed by SAIC for the CIA. SAIC is a major defense contractor and R&D company: http://www.washingtonpost.co…
> VirnetX is a company some call a "patent troll" because its only business is now patent enforcement. I believe this viewpoint is shared by a number of people. Specifically, that a litigious NPE is, by colloquial definition, a "patent troll." There is a conversation to be had as to whether the practice is good or bad, or if they are acting more appropriately than their peer group, but I think the term fits in this c…
I don't disagree it's a common viewpoint, I'm just saying it's not very useful to call every NPE a patent troll. It lumps universities together with companies that seek nuisance settlements using the cost of litigation as leverage.
In general, the law allows you to sell your cause of action to someone else. For example, many investors who had suits against big banks over mortgage-backed securities sold their causes of action to funds that could bring them efficiently in one go. That's just property rights in action. At least in theory, it's more efficient to allow rights of action to be sold like property.
Now, maybe you think that these sorts of suits shouldn't be brought at all. There's arguments to be made for that. But in that case, I think you need to lump companies like Apple in with companies like these.
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#33I don't know if it's fair to call VirnetX a "patent troll." They're an NPE, but there's no indication that they're abusing the process or trying to get a low-ball settlement just to avoid actually going to court. Furthermore, the patents aren't just something they churned out. The technology in question was developed by SAIC for the CIA. SAIC is a major defense contractor and R&D company: http://www.washingtonpost.co…
If it was developed for the CIA, why aren't the resulting patents owned by the government?
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#34If this happens, then maybe Apple will get behind real patent reform.
You mean, like they publicly stated they would when the Googlrola Android lawsuits were settled just recently?
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#35In this overwhelmingly depressing article, I saw a ray of hope, an enchanting possibility .. a silver lining if you will:
> Instead, two other mysterious companies came forward seeking to challenge VirnetX's patents. First was a shell company called New Bay Capital, which filed an IPR and then reportedly asked VirnetX for 10 percent of its massive jury award in exchange for backing off. New Bay dropped its case on April 4 without getting any money—and without revealing who was behind the claim.
Then came RPX, a defensive patent aggregator that has become increasingly well-known, and increasingly profitable, in recent years. RPX works by selling memberships to companies that feel harangued by patent trolls, including Apple and many other tech companies.
How wonderful it would be if the ultimate demise of patent trolls was brought about by other patent trolls :)
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#36Have you guys looked at the patents in this case? They look thick and serious, but if you actually read the claims, you will soon realize that it's nothing but an obvious and straightforward procedure for deciding when and with whom to establish a VPN. None of these patents make sure that a VPN connection is more secure, more reliable, or in any way better. Majority of the patent is explanation on how a VPN works, di…
Okay, I'm looking at 6502135...
Claim 1 is a joke. How does this not apply to HTTPS? I would toss it and all its dependents.
Claim 13 is almost as obvious, but in this case I am not sure about the dependent claims. Some of them sound to me like they might be inventions.
Claim 10 seems stronger to me. Networking is not my field, so I am not at all sure there is not prior art, but at least it seems to contain an actual idea.
I'm not going to read the whole description, but a quick scan seems to support your contention that there is a lot of material here that is not referenced by the claims.
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#37I actually hope the trolls win.[0]
I believe that the current state of IP law does far more to stifle innovation than to support it, and I fear that it will only change when sufficient monied interests become inclined to support a change.
Put another way, I believe change will come when the juggernauts like Apple stand to lose more than they gain from the current state of the law. Until then, I suspect that the status quo will continue.
[0] Others have made similar arguments, including Mark Cuban in re: Yahoo's patent suit vs. Facebook: http://blogmaverick.com/2012/03/13/i-hope-yahoo-crushes-face...
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about when they lobby to keep the current patent system in place. Can we blame them then, or is that the nature of the game, too?
Apple has a lot of money they could use to finance lobbying for patent reform. Maybe this will help them see the wisdom in that.
A strong signal would be if Apple raised prices for affected products (iPhones and iPods) by exactly 0.98% and send out a press release that this is necessary to offset increased patent-related costs and will only affect US prices.
Further increases are not expected, but can't be ruled out. Foreign pricing will not be affected.
I'd like to see politicians react to that...
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#39At some point, the patent trolls will force software companies like Apple, Google, and IBM to admit to themselves that software patents themselves have no value and cause more bad than good.
So we need more of these patent trolls to win substantially more and more revenue from these companies, until the pain is so great that the big companies do something about it.
Re: Patent troll on the verge of winning 1% of iPhone revenue
#40The fact that this is being heard in court and the patent holder is winning means, according to my definition, they aren't patent trolls. I define "patent troll" as an entity that has a sliver of a chance of winning, but 100% chance that they will impose high costs on the defendant at little cost to themselves. They use this assymetry as a form of legal extortion. They limit their downside by holding few assets aside…
Considering how new the term is we shouldn't so easily define it else we end up like hackers, which is broadly defined but has a negative perception in public.