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

Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 164 posts

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#131

Post by kaonashi »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #124
nickpsecurity wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company patented the concept of making toast well after toasters were on the market. Another patented recurring payments of online service long after that was normal. Another guy modified a patent to cover podcasting after podcasting was invented and in use. Point being, something being patented != something being invented. It just means examiners agreed with the claims of a piece of paper then turned that into a p…

>Point being, something being patented != something being invented. But it is still a valid patent. Don't say that specific patents are invalid, realize that the very concept of patents are invalid.

There is a spoon.

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#132

Post by rms_returns »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #123
rms_returns wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why doesn't your White House or Obama do something about it? (non-US citizen here).

Well, only Congress can impeach federal judges. So POTUS can't do anything in that regard, but POTUS administers the Patent Office. Obama could write one little letter telling them to mark all new patents and all old patents up for review as invalid. I believe this can be done without the approval of congress. I imagine there would be a lawsuit immediately from various parties. My best guess is that SCOTUS would be f…

patents.stackexchange.com is the answer to this. As you mentioned crowdsourcing as a means to scrutinize the patents, this website is exactly doing that. I hope someone on the jury panel at least refers to this website before awarding the patent trolls their victories.

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#133

Post by pbhjpbhj »

jeffdavis wrote: post #81
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #20

I have a modest proposal to get rid of these patent trolls and these ridiculous settlements that typically are decided by a jury of West Texas farmers. Patents ought to be designated a non-transferrable property. Inventors may create a trust that receives patent revenues, and direct those revenues to any entity they please (their own company, their heirs, another company, a charity, etc.) but would not be able to act…

I think you've misdiagnosed the problems. They have little to do with transferability. 1. Patents are a crap shoot. 2. No realistic means to recover legal fees if you do fight. 3. So it's a one-sided crap shoot. You could say that being a NPE is a part of #2, but there are easier ways to fix it: just require posting a bond when suing for patent infringement. If you lose, some or all legal expenses will be deducted. I…

>2. No realistic means to recover legal fees if you do fight. //

It's normal elsewhere to award costs to the defendant when the plaintiff/complainant is unsuccessful in a civil suit (particularly if the judge finds it lacks merit). AFAIU this doesn't happen in US courts - why on Earth not?

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#134

Post by kamaal »

SCHiM wrote: post #3

Ugh, disgusting. Think of how much damage that troll will now be able to wreak. With that kind of money it can buy all sorts of other patents and start the whole progress over again.

>>With that kind of money it can buy all sorts of other patents and start the whole progress over again.

Or just quit, $625 million is a lot of money. You can only do that much dirty work.

Plus you don't wan't to milk the cow to a point it bleeds and dies.

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#135

Post by nickpsecurity »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #124
nickpsecurity wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company patented the concept of making toast well after toasters were on the market. Another patented recurring payments of online service long after that was normal. Another guy modified a patent to cover podcasting after podcasting was invented and in use. Point being, something being patented != something being invented. It just means examiners agreed with the claims of a piece of paper then turned that into a p…

>Point being, something being patented != something being invented. But it is still a valid patent. Don't say that specific patents are invalid, realize that the very concept of patents are invalid.

The concept is valid but hard to implement in tech. Probably a bad idea, too.

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#136

Post by freehunter »

pc86 wrote: post #128
jahewson wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the judges and the court - somehow a mindset has developed there which is at odds with most other patent cases in the US. This is a part of the country which has very little, so big corporations fighting patent cases bring a lot of money into the area and prestige to a court which otherwise would be in a backwater. It's a federal court, so the same laws apply as anywhere else, but there's enough wiggle room in t…

Wow. > somehow a mindset has developed there which is at odds with most other patent cases in the US. Different courts form slightly different interpretations. There's a reason that the 2nd Circuit is the most liberal court. This court happens to be the most pro-plaintiff patent court you can find. It's not surprising the plaintiffs file there. > This is a part of the country which has very little Have you ever been…

>Do you think Apple fighting a court case floods money down the street like a river?

Yes. Lawyers have to eat, and they get paid enough to eat well. They need a place to stay, and they get paid enough to stay at a nice hotel. They need coffee, they need an airport, they need a rental car that needs gas. Your argument is that having people come to your city doesn't add to the local economy, but the fact that whole cities are built on tourism proves otherwise.

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#137

Post by WalterBright »

The large companies seem to be constantly in patent battles, often with each other, both as plaintiffs and as defendants. They win some and lose some. Since this is unproductive activity, due to lawyer bills and the diversion of attention from their core businesses, it simply must be a net loss for those players.

Why don't they call each other up, declare a truce, and cooperate in lobbying Congress to fix (i.e. largely repeal) patent law?

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#138

Post by iraphael »

WalterBright wrote: post #137

The large companies seem to be constantly in patent battles, often with each other, both as plaintiffs and as defendants. They win some and lose some. Since this is unproductive activity, due to lawyer bills and the diversion of attention from their core businesses, it simply must be a net loss for those players. Why don't they call each other up, declare a truce, and cooperate in lobbying Congress to fix (i.e. large…

Truces are declared to some extent with patent pools. Not a lot of action towards lobbying Congress for patent reform, though (which is very needed).

http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-competition/en/studi...

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#139

Post by josaka »

st3v3r wrote: post #90
josaka wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, it looks like they acquired these patents from a company that actually does make something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Applications_Internati... This is speculative, but these patent filings were probably part of a patent filing strategy that helped justify the employment of a what was likely a decent number of engineers by the original owner.

I really can't say I care about those jobs. The engineers would have more than likely found other jobs with actual companies that actually do stuff.

According to the inventors' employer's website at the time of filing of these patents: "Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a Fortune 500 company, is the largest employee-owned research and engineering company in the nation. We provide information technology and systems integration solutions worldwide."

https://web.archive.org/web/20000511195702/http://www.saic.c...

Re: Apple Ordered to Pay $625M to Patent Troll in FaceTime Lawsuit

#140

Post by macintux »

zanny wrote: post #113
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #20

I have a modest proposal to get rid of these patent trolls and these ridiculous settlements that typically are decided by a jury of West Texas farmers. Patents ought to be designated a non-transferrable property. Inventors may create a trust that receives patent revenues, and direct those revenues to any entity they please (their own company, their heirs, another company, a charity, etc.) but would not be able to act…

Can we just please abolish patents? Not just software patents, all of them. Can anyone give me an example of a patent issued in the last twenty years for a novel invention that then proved wildly successful and either protected the inventor from competition or even more importantly led to a lawsuit where the creator successfully beat a large company trying to copy their idea? And even if you can - is the exception ou…

Big pharma, for all its flaws, does in fact provide value.

And drug research & development absolutely relies on patents. If you spend half a billion (or more) developing a drug and generic drug manufacturers can immediately sell it for a few cents a pill, how do you recoup your investment?

I agree the patent system is broken, but abolishing it entirely isn't the answer. Perhaps revoking the business method patent decision is our best hope of regaining some level of sanity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_method_patent#The_cha...

Post reply on HN