Live data from Hacker News

Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

geekwire.com

31–40 of 78 posts

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#31

IV is a garbage company trying to portray itself as a bastion of innovation. There are certain severe "bugs" in the way our intellectual property laws work in the US. IV exploits these bugs to make Billions of dollars. IV is not concerned with whether something is good or not. They exist to make hay while the intellectual property laws remain broken. I had no idea they had 500 people working for them. That means that…

Do you find judgement and shame to be constructive communication tools for positive change?

IV is an evil corporation. It does not feel pain. It cannot be reasoned with. Nathan Myhrvold struck it rich with Microsoft, then he beat cancer and now he's repaying us for all this luck by becoming the biggest patent troll the world has ever seen. Nathan is a shitstain.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#32
post #27

I was part of a "partnership" with IV and MagicJack. http://www.intellectualventures.com/news/press-releases/magi... Even though the PR seems to say that MJ is joining the force - you can clearly see that none of the original Vocaltec/Magicjack VoIP patents have been asserted against anyone else/used as defense in any patent lawsuit. By playing ball, we were able to use their patent portfolio to defend against the MA…

The lawsuits that IV helped you defend against, were those from trolls or from practicing entities that had patents?

I'm asking because I would think that having a bunch of patents would only protect you against practicing entities that are in violation of random other patents just by being alive, it wouldn't really stop trolls from trolling. Do I have that right?

(Possibly an ignorant question, sorry.)

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#33

IV is a garbage company trying to portray itself as a bastion of innovation. There are certain severe "bugs" in the way our intellectual property laws work in the US. IV exploits these bugs to make Billions of dollars. IV is not concerned with whether something is good or not. They exist to make hay while the intellectual property laws remain broken. I had no idea they had 500 people working for them. That means that…

I think dogpiling Intellectual Ventures is striking at the branches, and not at the root. The problem isn’t “patent trolls.” The problem is patents:

> Even if patents actually accomplished their advertised purpose — “securing for limited Times to … Inventors the exclusive Right to their … Discoveries,” as the US Constitution puts it — they’d be a very bad idea. The claim that one can own an idea is silly on its face, and not a claim that anyone would pay the slightest mind to were it not enforced at gunpoint by the state.

> But the advertised purpose of patents is not their actual purpose.

> Their actual purpose is to restrain competition and limit innovation so as to provide economic advantage — monopoly pricing power, in fact — to established firms who, by virtue of their ability to pay off (pardon my indelicate language; I believe the word I’m looking for is “lobby”) politicians, bureaucrats and judges, can thereby indulge their desire avoid market competition on price or quality. [1]

[1] http://c4ss.org/content/24371

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#34
post #27

I was part of a "partnership" with IV and MagicJack. http://www.intellectualventures.com/news/press-releases/magi... Even though the PR seems to say that MJ is joining the force - you can clearly see that none of the original Vocaltec/Magicjack VoIP patents have been asserted against anyone else/used as defense in any patent lawsuit. By playing ball, we were able to use their patent portfolio to defend against the MA…

The lawsuits that IV helped you defend against, were those from trolls or from practicing entities that had patents? I'm asking because I would think that having a bunch of patents would only protect you against practicing entities that are in violation of random other patents just by being alive, it wouldn't really stop trolls from trolling. Do I have that right? (Possibly an ignorant question, sorry.)

Not an ignorant question at all!

All were from trolls/non-practicing entities except for one (which we settled). As soon as we went public, we became a target.

It would come in the form of:

"Hello, we are XYZ company are you are infringing on 1,324 of our patents related to computing and to communicating over USB - we would be happy to not move forward with our lawsuit for the sum of $500,000"

We called it the reverse nigerian prince.

It protected us from the vast majority of trolls - and it really came down to the "thump" test. The thump test is when company A asserts patents against company B. Company A comes storming in the court room (or via plain ole email) and drops it's stack of patents on top of the table. We now have to invalidate each and every claim which puts the vast majority of the burden on us. We would then turn around and drop our borrowed patent portfolio on the desk and it would thump pretty loud as well. That stopped 95% of the major patent lawsuits from moving forward, as stupid as it was. We took an aggressive stance to counter-sue for patent infringement and ALSO to invalidate via prior-art. Instead of sharks smelling blood in the water, we stopped getting the lawsuits because we aggressive sought to not only stop a lawsuit, but to invalidate the patent from ever being asserted again due to prior art which could be applied in any future patent lawsuit case (and in some instances, would invalidate the patent or have it "re-examined")

Unfortunately, I feel there is still a very vulnerable phase of small business between profitable and not profitable enough to employ these strategies. As the MJs of the world (~$200M market cap) start to adapt - the trolls simply get change their nigerian email to $100,000 instead of $500,000 and start working their way down to smaller companies.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#35
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more simple than that. Does IV produce anything? If they don't have a product or a revenue stream other than suing companies, then they are parasite to the economy.

That is a simplistic argument. What is the difference between a large company with several labs producing 'innovation' and a large company funding several labs to produce 'innovation'?

Those examples have nothing to do with my argument. Both of your examples neglect the crux of my statement. Paying for patents is not the same as funding innovation. Funding innovation may involve paying for patents.

What I stated is that if your company makes its only revenue by the litigation involved with the patents it purchases, it is a parasite. Why? Because it does not produce any goods or services to keep the economy moving.

Edit:typo and grammar

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#36

IV is a garbage company trying to portray itself as a bastion of innovation. There are certain severe "bugs" in the way our intellectual property laws work in the US. IV exploits these bugs to make Billions of dollars. IV is not concerned with whether something is good or not. They exist to make hay while the intellectual property laws remain broken. I had no idea they had 500 people working for them. That means that…

I think dogpiling Intellectual Ventures is striking at the branches, and not at the root. The problem isn’t “patent trolls.” The problem is patents: > Even if patents actually accomplished their advertised purpose — “securing for limited Times to … Inventors the exclusive Right to their … Discoveries,” as the US Constitution puts it — they’d be a very bad idea. The claim that one can own an idea is silly on its face,…

Poisoning the fruit of those branches (those who've worked there) is absolutely fine by me.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#37
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IV spends a large amount of money (billions [1]) on purchasing patents. One might reasonably expect that to encourage innovation. I don't see how purchasing any kind of patents can encourage innovation. Innovation is encouraged by returns from the innovation, not by returns from sold patents. Recycling patents for profit is a completely parasitic business which has nothing to do with innovation.

If you give money to people in exchange for innovation that encourages innovation. That said, purchasing patents only encourages innovation if those patents are the product of innovation.

Judging by the current patent system, patents and innovation aren't equal in many cases. On the contrary, patents are often equal to the stifling of innovation. So giving money for patents is not equal to giving money for innovation in general case.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#38
> Companies could buy into the fund, and in exchange, it potentially received legal protection from the patent portfolio.

This is like a gun company asking you to invest in them and in exchange, they guarantee their guns won't be used to attack you.

There's a word for this kind of practice: extortion.

If anything, I'm sad that the 140 people being laid off only represent 20% of that scum company.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#39

IV is a garbage company trying to portray itself as a bastion of innovation. There are certain severe "bugs" in the way our intellectual property laws work in the US. IV exploits these bugs to make Billions of dollars. IV is not concerned with whether something is good or not. They exist to make hay while the intellectual property laws remain broken. I had no idea they had 500 people working for them. That means that…

I think dogpiling Intellectual Ventures is striking at the branches, and not at the root. The problem isn’t “patent trolls.” The problem is patents: > Even if patents actually accomplished their advertised purpose — “securing for limited Times to … Inventors the exclusive Right to their … Discoveries,” as the US Constitution puts it — they’d be a very bad idea. The claim that one can own an idea is silly on its face,…

> The problem is patents:

No, patents are fine. The problem is that current patent laws enable patent trolls. If we could find a way to eradicate patent trolls while preserving patents, their intent would be served much better.

For example, you should only be able to acquire patents if you can prove you have a business pertinent to those patents. This kind of measure would instantly kill all patent trolls.

Re: Intellectual Ventures cuts 140 employees from its patent-buying workforce

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you find judgement and shame to be constructive communication tools for positive change?

IV is an evil corporation. It does not feel pain. It cannot be reasoned with. Nathan Myhrvold struck it rich with Microsoft, then he beat cancer and now he's repaying us for all this luck by becoming the biggest patent troll the world has ever seen. Nathan is a shitstain.

> then he beat cancer

I think you're confusing him with Paul Allen on this point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Allen#Microsoft

Post reply on HN