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

New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#81

Post by bdowling »

analog31 wrote: post #42
simoncion wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...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…

If it can't be reduced to practice, then it's a vanity patent, but also, impossible to violate.

A patent application is a constructive reduction to practice. MPEP 2138.05. https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2138.html#:~:tex...

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#82

Post by zdragnar »

lofaszvanitt wrote: post #68
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's generally considered bad policy to make it illegal for poor people to sue.

Yeah, that's trivial. But law has so many edge cases and seemingly it always favor either powerful or wealthy individuals. Plus, poor people cannot afford the litigation costs...

> seemingly it always favor either powerful or wealthy individuals

Reality is in favor of the powerful and wealthy. It's practically a tautological statement that powerful people are more powerful than those who are not.

Poor people do have the option of seeking pro bono, contingency (lawyers paid from winnings or settlements), or other means, but they will still not have things like daycare / nanny for children, free time (still need to work to pay bills while trial is pending), prepared meals, staff to handle shopping / laundry / cleaning, or a billion other things that make the stress of going through the court system easier to bear.

You could probably say goodbye to pro bono or contingency work if you also had to prove you have the money to pay legal fees before you could go to court.

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#83

Post by sph »

elevatedastalt wrote: post #16
amelius wrote: post #5

We should have notarized LLM models for this. Timestamp your LLMs, put them in a notarized database. Then, if you en up in a patent lawsuit, just fire up the relevant LLM, and ask it in simple terms to reproduce troll's claims.

Should it be put on the Blockchain too?

Make sure to use MongoDB which is web scale.

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#84

Post by FireBeyond »

jnsie wrote: post #62
dctoedt wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See Blue Jeans Cable's classic response to a patent cease-and-desist letter from Monster Cables: The Blue Jeans Cable CEO was a former litigator who pulled no punches in his response. [0] [0] See https://www.oncontracts.com/monster-cables-picked-the-wrong-... (self-cite).

> Not only am I unintimidated by litigation; I sometimes rather miss it. Sumptuous!

The original (https://www.bluejeanscable.com/legal/mcp/response041408.pdf) has so much more. It is truly a work of art:

> RE: Your letter, received April Fools' Day

> Let me begin by stating, without equivocation, that I have no interest in infringing upon any intellectual property belonging to Monster Cable. Indeed, the less my customers think my products resemble Monster's, in form or function, the better.

> Similarly, as I note further below, you omit reference to another patent Monster has held which appears, frankly to be fatal to your position. If you expect to persuade me, you had better start making full, open and honest disclosures

> It looks like when you sent this letter, you were operating on the premise that I am not smart enough to see through your deceptions or sophisticated enough to intelligently evaluate your claims; shame on you.

> You are welcome to point out any errors in my reasoning; but I have to say that I will be unreservedly surprised if you are successful in doing so.

> It may be that my inability to see the pragmatic value of settling frivolous claims is a deep character flaw

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#85

Post by FireBeyond »

zdragnar wrote: post #82
lofaszvanitt wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's trivial. But law has so many edge cases and seemingly it always favor either powerful or wealthy individuals. Plus, poor people cannot afford the litigation costs...

> seemingly it always favor either powerful or wealthy individuals Reality is in favor of the powerful and wealthy. It's practically a tautological statement that powerful people are more powerful than those who are not. Poor people do have the option of seeking pro bono, contingency (lawyers paid from winnings or settlements), or other means, but they will still not have things like daycare / nanny for children, fre…

> Reality is in favor of the powerful and wealthy. It's practically a tautological statement that powerful people are more powerful than those who are not.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."

-- Anatole France

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#86

Post by worik »

hattmall wrote: post #79
conartist6 wrote: post #40

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…

The defense to this is multiple LLCs and licensing schemes. Just like the troll, don't hold any assets in the vulnerable LLC. If Walmart sells a bootleg shirt the IP holder can't sue the company that cleans the parking lot.

That is a lot of effort, and expensive

Probably ineffective too, as some part of your firm must hold the assets, and that's the part that gets sued

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#87

Post by mmooss »

Someone1234 wrote: post #17
elevatedastalt wrote: post #15

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?

The troll is lawyers, so it only costs their own time.

Their time is worth more than the $25K they want.

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#89

Post by atkailash »

niwtsol wrote: post #14

We dealt with some patent trolls back in the 2010-2020 era, for those who have not experienced it, it is absurd. In our case, the patent "troll" was an LLC w/ ~5 members - 2 lawyers, 1 person who owned the original patent, and some spouses. The only "asset" of the LLC was the patent. I think it was around scrollbars or some CSS overflow thing - they sent us a demand/cease-desist letter saying they will sue for $1M an…

[dead]

Re: New USPTO Memo Makes Fighting Patent Trolls Even Harder

#90

Post by phendrenad2 »

rcxdude wrote: post #24
Teever wrote: post #21

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.

Many times the lawyers involved have private practices or work at a firm that handles other, non-patent-trolling, cases. If word gets out that the firm's members are moonlighting as patent troll facilitators, it could impact their business.
Post reply on HN