41–50 of 109 posts
Why do we keep moving toward a system where being ahead is the most viable way to get ahead?
because r > g
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equat...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that if an LLM trained prior to the patent date can reproduce the invention, then either the idea is obvious or there was prior art in the training set; either way the patent is invalid.
> ...if an LLM trained prior to the patent date can reproduce the invention... Would we even be able to tell if the machine reproduced the invention covered by the claims in the patent? I (regrettably) have my name on some US software patents. I've read the patents, have intimate knowledge of the software they claim to cover, and see nearly zero relation between the patent and the covered software. If I set a skilled…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't it cost a lot in legal fee to the troll too? How are they able to finance it given that they are basically a sham company?
Because they don't expect to win the lawsuit. Their odds of winning a lawsuit aren't that good, so their goal is to badger a founder into settling. A founder would likely be killing their creative endeavor to become their own lawyer and go to court for themselves, and the trolls choose targets for whom paying a lawyer for the length of one of these trials would be prohibitively costly. In other words, their real busi…
1. You buy "litigation insurance."
2. You state that you are insured on your website.
3. The insurance company is required to defend in all patent cases that arise, so there is no doubt that you will be represented in court.
4. Nobody sues.
5. The insurance company makes a profit with no cost or risk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does that help? A patent troll doesn't really have any reputation to protect.
Would the bar association in the lawyer’s state be interested?
It's for sure scummy, but from what I've read about patent trolls, usually they get to continue until they eventually run into someone principled (and bankrolled) and then they lose their patent due to prior art in many cases.
I've never heard of them getting in actual trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because r > g
Not sure what that is but it's more like the Lotka-Volterra equations (predator–prey model). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equat...
> Congress Created IPR to Protect the Public—Not Just Patent Owners For this administration, this is a problem to be solved. Big business are the masters now and we need to make it easier for them to step on small business by any means.
Big business isn't really monolithic when it comes to patents. Some large tech companies love patents (MSFT, e.g.), while others (Google, e.g.) seem to abhor them. Also, the troll problem is a problem for big business, not a benefit to big business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they don't expect to win the lawsuit. Their odds of winning a lawsuit aren't that good, so their goal is to badger a founder into settling. A founder would likely be killing their creative endeavor to become their own lawyer and go to court for themselves, and the trolls choose targets for whom paying a lawyer for the length of one of these trials would be prohibitively costly. In other words, their real busi…
How's this? 1. You buy "litigation insurance." 2. You state that you are insured on your website. 3. The insurance company is required to defend in all patent cases that arise, so there is no doubt that you will be represented in court. 4. Nobody sues. 5. The insurance company makes a profit with no cost or risk.
I have no experience with this, and the only time I've gone and tried to get quoted for things like cyber liability, etc, the costs are incredible relative to the value of the business and revenues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they don't expect to win the lawsuit. Their odds of winning a lawsuit aren't that good, so their goal is to badger a founder into settling. A founder would likely be killing their creative endeavor to become their own lawyer and go to court for themselves, and the trolls choose targets for whom paying a lawyer for the length of one of these trials would be prohibitively costly. In other words, their real busi…
How's this? 1. You buy "litigation insurance." 2. You state that you are insured on your website. 3. The insurance company is required to defend in all patent cases that arise, so there is no doubt that you will be represented in court. 4. Nobody sues. 5. The insurance company makes a profit with no cost or risk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The correct course of action in situations like this is to name and shame.
How does that help? A patent troll doesn't really have any reputation to protect.
The more people know that someone is doing unscrupulous things the more people can choose to not do business with that person or interact with them in a friendly matter.
Ideally this would lead to a scenario where they lose the means to continue to do unacceptable things and they would be forced to stop.