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

Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

clickerheroes2.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 200 posts

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#51

Post by [deleted] »

scarmig wrote: post #14
jannotti wrote: post #2

Trying to find other companies under the same threat is a great approach. In a similar situation, this allowed my company to fight a patent troll and share costs, so we didn't cave under the, "It'll cost us this much in legal fees anyway" argument.

There should be some kind of patent troll clearinghouse. Companies can check it to see if other companies are reporting the same shakedown tactics for a given patent. Though, could a patent troll could get around that by spacing out the trolling? So by the time any company finds another company that's been trolled, they've already paid it up and don't have as much incentive to fight the patent troll after the fact. T…

[deleted]

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#52

Post by subroutine »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #33
viraptor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're still selling to the US, I don't think this would protect you. Your product can be banned anyway.

Your product could be banned, but the sue-er would never collect any money. So, if the sue-er is a patent troll, why would they bother? They don't care about banning competition. They'd burn a lot of money on lawyers for zero income. That's not a fight that they want to pick.

If the company was making 35k/yr operating in the US and you sue for 35k one-time fee, do you think they'd do it?

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#53

Post by kelnos »

rhizome wrote: post #21
rs999gti wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens So cam girl sites are under threat?

Once they get some precedent under their belt. They have to do this via small-time operators first because porn people have money.

If most or all the small-time operators settle, that doesn't set precedent, though, right? A judge isn't going to look at a future case and say "well, all these other companies settled, so seems like the patent is valid". That would be absurd.

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#54

Post by zaroth »

This patent is absurd... selling credits was invented about a day after the concept of money itself. Accounting for those credits in a database was done by the fucking Egyptians. What the heck does this patent actually teach? It teaches absolutely nothing. It goes on for pages describing technology that already existed at the time and for decades prior to 2000. It’s a disgrace and an embarrassment.

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#56

Post by jrochkind1 »

josaka wrote: post #20
maaarghk wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed the response from Playsaurus' attorney, as well as stating why CH2 is not infringing, lays out arguments suggesting the 838 patent should not be valid. I'm curious if someone familiar with the matter happens to be reading - is there any provision in the system for Playsaurus to now have the case taken the court regardless of the fact GTX did not infact file a lawsuit, i.e. attempt to have it invalidated eve…

Yes. They would arguably have standing to bring a declaratory judgment action, asking a court to invalidate the patent. They should also look for (now relatively common) state law provisions that provide damages for bad faith demand letters.

That would be pretty expensive though. Is why nearly any non-huge company is going to take someone dropping their claim as a huge victory, and not try to go to court anyway.

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#57

Post by codingdave »

Letters can be ignored. Lawsuits must be responded to. And that same 35K will be offered as a deal after they file, if they file. They are trying to save THEIR legal costs, not yours. Let them sue. Fight it in court. Hopefully win. Counter-sue for your legal fees. Booyah.

Note: IANAL, and any actual lawyer would be less flippant. But seriously... don't let attorneys bully you.

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#58

Post by brink »

oldcynic wrote: post #55

Hard to decide how I feel here. I hate software patents and patent trolls, but I also hate what f2p and premium currencies have done to gaming. Which is the lesser of these evils?

"Is murder okay, as long as you're murdering Hitler?"

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#59

Post by rlabrecque »

codingdave wrote: post #57

Letters can be ignored. Lawsuits must be responded to. And that same 35K will be offered as a deal after they file, if they file. They are trying to save THEIR legal costs, not yours. Let them sue. Fight it in court. Hopefully win. Counter-sue for your legal fees. Booyah. Note: IANAL, and any actual lawyer would be less flippant. But seriously... don't let attorneys bully you.

Doesn't the article say this patent has been successfully used in the past and thus there's likely precedence? :/

Re: Patent trolls are shaking us down for selling “rubies” in our game

#60

Post by TillE »

chapill wrote: post #41
sli wrote: post #4

Pretty obvious patent trolling if they're only going for this rather smalltime developer and none of the high profile F2P game developers and big time game developers releasing AAA games with a premium currency.

>Pretty obvious patent trolling Not really. The patent was filed in 2000. Approved in 2007. It hasn't changed hands. The company makes software. Believe it or not, this is the US system working as intended. An obvious troll is a patent holding company, with no products, who purchases old patents, then goes on a suing spree for any company that uses printers.

Like the peculiarly specific definition of "startup" which is often used here, I don't believe that very specific definition of patent trolling is commonly accepted. I'm sure you could find examples from Slashdot 10+ years ago where it's clearly intended as a more general "abusive exploitation of patents for monetary gain".
Post reply on HN