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

Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

rackspace.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 103 posts

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#41

Post by SeanDav »

rayiner wrote: post #35
SeanDav wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see this as shady. Suing and defending being sued is expensive enough to worry even medium sized companies. Exploring other options first seems like good business practice to me.

The part that seems sketchy to me isn't the agreement itself, but not disclosing what you're threatening to sue for. Plaintiffs usually come at you with a litany of grievances. You can hash them out in court or settle, but you know up front what you're fighting about.

Oh sure, I agree totally with you on that.

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#42

Post by zmmmmm »

rayiner wrote: post #4

> In actuality, it is a bit more complicated. Our dealings with this particular troll reach back to December 2010 when IP Navigation Group (IP Nav), as agent for a supposedly secret patent owner, now known as Parallel Iron, accused Rackspace of patent infringement. IP Nav told us that they could not divulge the details of their infringement claims – not even the patent numbers or the patent owner – unless we entered…

It's worth noting that it's very very close to the same tactic Microsoft pursued in targeting Android OEMs. Basically forcing them to sign non-disclosure agreements before letting them even know which patents they violated. Then when Barnes and Noble finally refused and forced (some of) the patents into the open something like 90% of them were found to be bogus. But this was after dozens of OEMs were extorted into licensing these dodgy patents based on the up front NDA.

This one act of Microsoft's has made it very hard for me to buy any of their products. I feel like I'm funding a patent extortionist (I would call them a "troll" but I know many people would nitpick the definition of that).

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#43

Post by jbooth »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #18
jbigelow76 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why not sue them right then and there" If I read it correctly Rackspace probably wanted to see if they could be legitimately (in the eyes of the law) at fault. The way I read that mind bogglingly stupid forbearance dance was as if a bill collector calls me up and says I have a bill to pay, but they won't tell me what it's for unless I promise not to dispute it. I'm not going sue then and there because maybe I really…

Well it speaks to the 'trollness' of patent trolling. In the Prenda Law case (and other copyright cases) the judiciary has decided in many cases that the 'threaten with action' strategy used is an issue. Had this been a "real" patent case the patent holder would approach Rackspace, say we think you infringe on patent X and you need to license that from us or stop infringing. Then license negotiations begin, and then…

Unlike a bar fight, getting the jump on someone with your pint glass doesn't really count for much in court.

Don't get me wrong, if someone came to me with a mystery case and that dumbass agreement, I'd be sorely tempted to officially respond via certified letter with a single piece of paper stating "LOL."

But as is, it looks like they get a little mileage out of the idiots forgetting about the 30 day agreement. So their approach did help a bit.

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#45

Post by chatmasta »

rayiner wrote: post #38
notahacker wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't understand why anyone would sign away their right to counter-sue in order to obtain information on something which can't possibly damage them until the information is disclosed anyway (IANAL)

It might be the plaintiffs way of identifying targets that don't have the will or money to litigate. A larger company isn't going to sign one of these--it doesn't buy you barely anything.

So does it by you a lot of something, or nothing?

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#46

Post by biot »

hkmurakami wrote: post #29
aroman wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there even a reasonable situation where a one-sided "forbearance agreement" is ever appropriate? Or even remotely fair? That seems like basically writing up a contract that says "By signing this you owe me $100" but entrenching and obfuscating it in 75 pages of legalese.

An acquaintance told me a story where a neighbour in his condominium complex (who lived directly under him) asked for a right of first refusal for nothing in return if/when she eventually put her unit on the market... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_first_refusal

If the right of first refusal only applies to the asking price, there isn't much downside except if the market is hot and/or you have a highly sought-after place where multiple bidders push the price above the asking price. If that's not the case, set the asking price at an amount you're confident the market won't pay, and the psychological pressure of the neighbor having wanted right of first refusal might make them buy at your inflated price.

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#47

Post by Ilmesnkie_Jones »

vacri wrote: post #34
aroman wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there even a reasonable situation where a one-sided "forbearance agreement" is ever appropriate? Or even remotely fair? That seems like basically writing up a contract that says "By signing this you owe me $100" but entrenching and obfuscating it in 75 pages of legalese.

I heard this used as an example against the legal uselessness of disclaimers on emails - they can't force you into a contract without your consent, and to be clearer, the example was given: "By reading this you agree to pay me $100 immediately"....

That wouldn't be a valid contract for several reasons. What's the consideration, acceptance?

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#48

Post by tomflack »

hkmurakami wrote: post #29
aroman wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there even a reasonable situation where a one-sided "forbearance agreement" is ever appropriate? Or even remotely fair? That seems like basically writing up a contract that says "By signing this you owe me $100" but entrenching and obfuscating it in 75 pages of legalese.

An acquaintance told me a story where a neighbour in his condominium complex (who lived directly under him) asked for a right of first refusal for nothing in return if/when she eventually put her unit on the market... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_first_refusal

Did they intend for it to be a formal contract?

I feel that for every major, an introduction to business/contract law unit should be undertaken if only to educate people on the formal rules that surround the contracts everyone enters in to during their lives.

Re: Why Rackspace Is Suing The Most Notorious Patent Troll In America

#50

Post by eykanal »

Question for someone who knows something about patent law: does Rackspace have a chance of actually making any money here? Simply based on seeing other stories like this, it seems that all these trolls operate through shell companies, which can simply declare bankruptcy without (1) every paying any actual fees and (2) without hurting the parent. Is that true here as well?
Post reply on HN