Octopus ain't free, you know.
Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
51–60 of 77 posts
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#52This is the problem with Patent troll "portfolio companies" like his: It doesn't make anything, so there can never be a countersuit with protective patents. So, even if we had IBM step in with its portfolio of 30,000 patents (and growing by 5000 each year) and snarl up the entire industry to prove a point, Allen would be like "whatever" and soldier on, because he makes nothing.
> because he makes nothing He does license patents, if IBM can prove one the licensed patent is based on one or more IBM patents, they could counter sue.
as i understood it you can patent improvements on patented technology even if you don't hold those patents. You just can't ever use your improvements without a license.
If that really is true, then Paul Allen isn't infringing, the people who are licensing from him are.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
thanks for the link. That was very interesting. It's really amazing how the entire fashion industry even without any sort of protection is running well.
While the fashions themselves aren't protected, the names of the labels etc. are trademarked. That's why you're seeing the Gucci and Dolce & Gabbana names on everything. And the Luis Vuitton luggage pattern contains their logo. A lot of stuff produced is basically nothing but a vehicle for the logo itself, without much fashion/innovation around it.
True. However analogously software companies also have trade-secret protection from employees divulging source code independent of the software patent process.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sad to see him become a Patent troll. Yes, quite. Paul Allen had an excellent reputation up to this point. He always struck me as the one with the interesting projects, such as backing Burt Rutan. > Some of them will surely fight back. all of them will fight back.
Maybe he is trying to destroy the patent system. If you have valid patents that read on various valuable products, and you can bank roll a credible law suit asking for injunctions and not accepting any other kind of relief , that might create enough chaos to get the attention of law makers.
Reading the headline, that was exactly my hope. The details make that appear unlikely, but it may be the result regardless.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Patents are referenced here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://online.wsj.com/pub... U.S. PATENT NO. 6,263,507 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,757,682 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,788,314 U.S. PATENT NO. 6,034,652
- 6,263,507: Browser for use in navigating a body of information, with particular application to browsing information represented by audiovisual data http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec... - 6,034,652: Attention manager for occupying the peripheral attention of a person in the vicinity of a display device http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sec... - 6,788,314: Attention manager f…
Just going by titles it sounds like the NYTimes related article popup at the bottom of an article would be covered by these even more than some of the alleged companies.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#56Another interesting way to look at it, if he did win big in this case then gave it all to worthy causes it could be a net win for society.
Hopefully it draws attention to software patents flaws. If government were hesitant to move away from them altogether maybe they could try a 2 year trail of no new patents or something.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#57If Larry can, why Paul cannot? ^_^
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#58This is the problem with Patent troll "portfolio companies" like his: It doesn't make anything, so there can never be a countersuit with protective patents. So, even if we had IBM step in with its portfolio of 30,000 patents (and growing by 5000 each year) and snarl up the entire industry to prove a point, Allen would be like "whatever" and soldier on, because he makes nothing.
disclaimer- I'm against software patents in general. However, in this case, to argue against my own opinions:
The research and resultant patents in this case were in the public record for all to see, read, and if they found the idea useable, free to contact the patent holder to discuss a deal.
The patent systems a broken mess - no argument here. But a firm that actually did research on specific items, kept track of a relatively small portfolio and then selectively went after some big boys isn't as much of a patent troll as those who just buy up thousands and thousands of them and muscle people around.)
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#59So he's suing Apple, Google, AOL, eBay, Facebook, Netflix, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples, Yahoo and YouTube.
The only one missing from that list is Microsoft, wonder why... and youtube == google.
It's obvious why - nobody said patents were "fair". The patent holder has his own discretion.
He's not suing microsoft because he'd be shooting himself in the foot. He might have a deal with them to license it, or he may just be letting it slide (he can always sue them later). Same with google.
He's under no obligation to enforce his patents - it's up to him.
Re: Paul Allen Sues Apple, Others Over Patents
#60Sad to see him become a Patent troll. Also, what could be the point of such a lawsuit? Surely Paul Allen cannot think that he can have out-of-court settlements (no cross-licensing since his company does not produce anything) with all the listed companies. Some of them will surely fight back.
The only way they can fight back is to invalidate the patent or prove it doesn't apply to their situation.
And "patent trolls" tend to collect and file tons of almost meaninglessly broad patents and hten send armies of analysts and lawyers to look at them and find some small or big fish to sue, depending.
In this case, the patents were filed by Mr. Allen's venture itself, a venture created as a think-tank to do research and come up with ideas - which were then published (via the patent mechanism) for the world to see, and potentially license - all they had to do was keep an eye on the patent system and contact the right people to ask for a license.