What would you do if the US patent office gave you the go-ahead on a far-reaching, non-specific application filed for a "mobile entertainment and communication device"? If your answer was that you would immediately draw up lawsuits against almost every major electronics manufacturer that even looked at a smartphone funny, you get a cookie. Yes folks, as impossible as it is to believe, the holders of the aforementioned patent have just sued Apple, Nokia, RIM, Sprint, AT&T, HP, Motorola, Helio, HTC, Sony Ericsson, UTStarcomm, and Samsung... amongst others. So eager was this company to sue, in fact, that legal papers were filed a day before the patent was granted, and subsequently had to re-submitted. The real sucker-punch here is that the patent simply combines a list of prior technologies jumbled into one product, a practice which has recently been ruled against by the Supreme Court. Still, we doubt it will stop the holders from trying to nab a few dollars in settlements, staying the work of real innovators, and generally making a mockery of our patent system. Bravo!
[Via
Slashdot]
posted January 25th 2008 11:58PM
I lol'd.
I'm sorry, but I have a patent on "1st! LOL-OMG-DAT'ROXORS!".
You owe me 5 dollars.
Austin, I have the patent on "first failed joke". You owe me "1 MILLION DOLLARS *pinky to mouth*".
I have a patent to the patent office and the storage facilities they use; therefore, all patents belong to me... muhahaha
Sorry, this is trash, smartphones were already patented by this date, more like Minerva (GOT NERVE?) owes everyone else money.
Goto Hell
Inventors: Kim; Ki Il (Los Angeles, CA)
Assignee: Minerva Industries, Inc. (Los Angeles, CA)
Appl. No.: 10/719,363
Filed: November 20, 2003
The last paragraph says:
Thus, by this invention a palm-sized device provides wireless communication with the Internet for downloading musical and visual entertainment onto a high capacity memory card that is replaceable with other prerecorded or downloaded memory cards, and numerous other communication, security, safety and similar functions are selectively available to the user.
Yeah, those KIRF posts should now be labeled Keepin' It Real - because if you can't make it better than a copycat you should try again.
And usually if your product is better, people don't bother buying the junk one :]
Surely you yanks have a concept of "prior art" in your IP laws? Even in 2003, there were smartphones already on the market.
xbit:
We really don't have any laws here... Its mainly whoever yells the loudest and makes their face the reddest wins.
I think this case might be claiming priority all the way back to 1997.
http://gigatec.com/index.asp
gigatec@sbcglobal.net
Hmmmm.... wonder how many emails their server can handle.
Congratulations! I would like to shake hands with the person who thought up of this thing! (No, not really.) My golden, platinum plated, computer fan cooled, infrared lighted hats off to you gentlemen.
(Sarcasm)
I'm Sorry, but I have a patent on golden, platinum plated, computer fan cooled, infrared lighted hats, and I haven't ever made any, which tells me that you are infringing on my creation. please send 5 dollars and your hat to me.
I'm sorry, but I have a patent on making any further patents.
You owe me... money.
Hee! hee! hee! That was a nice one.
Boy, this hat is heavy! (Drops on head) Ouch!
This country needs anti-douche laws.
I just patented "Digital (fingers) manipulation (turn on) of electrical power initiator(power switch) of an electrical computation device (PC/MAC Computer).
I now own all you Bitchez, pay up!!!
Yet another Eastern District of Texas, Judge Folsom dumb ass ruling no doubt. Thats no suprise. He put a ban on the term "Patent Troll" in his office.
Wish we could bar this a-hole from any and all technology!
Minerva Industries - One
US patent office - Zero
Minerva FTW!
I'm sorry, but I have the phrase "FTW!" trademarked and you owe me five dollars.
I'm filing a patent for "a method of filing lawsuits". Pay up, bitches.
I'm afraid to even comment since these words may already be patented.
They are.
Pay up.
....now.
*just been sued for violating patent on "method for commenting"*
DAMMIT!
So who do I have to pay for reading text on an electronic screen while breathing?
If you have to ask, you can't afford it :/
Who do you think? Steve Jobs!
No Al Gore
Sorry Al, had to do it. I know you are reading this in your digital compound.
I think I'm going to file for a patent on the Internet. Start running now folks...
It wasn't me this time!
lol wonderful....why didn't anyone think of this before? A great get rich quick scheme I suppose...lol
attention!!!!! i hold a patent: "way of sticking in the a$$" pay up.... only in US of A. Fcukin wasting our tax dollars and time of our courts.
I'm putting a patent on large, bipedal, ape like hominid with opposable thumbs who inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.
That's right, I'm suing everyone on earth, and maybe some Apes.
That's how generic, vague and ridiculous that lawsuit is.
Hmm, must have run outta crack money and this was their only option.... wait that theory is already patented? damn.
The US really should do something to prevent these patent trolls... seriously...
100% agreed. There needs to be a serious overhaul to the patent system. If someone develops a technology, there is a time limit on when they need to have that product available, and they can only get an extension on the patent if they can show they actually spent R&D money to create said product.
If these dumb ass patent trolls keep this up, it could stifle creative ideas in the future.
I mean, if their idea is so important to patent, why wasn't it important to make it into a usable product or service?
ChillyWilly, there is no doubt that the system need revision, however what you suggest is exactly what it DOESN'T need. I understand that you think this is the cause of "patent trolls" but it really isn't. What you are suggesting is in effect that only large companies should be allowed to hold patents, because only they have the funds to develop and get to market entire products. If the system you suggest were to go into place, then large companies would just all refuse to license any technology, because then they would just have to wait a short amount of time for it to go unproduced and unlicensed, and then it would be fair game without paying the inventor a penny.
No, the problem with the patent system isn't that anyone is allowed to patent. That is actually what is good about our system. The problem is that there is no attempt made to check the validity of the patent before granting it. The way the current system works, the patent's validity is determined in court, which means that win or loose the lawyers still get paid, and so are still willing to drag it through the court. This is exacerbated by the number of patent holding firms run by lawyers, who can just make it their career to buy up and then litigate patents. Even if only 1 in 10 gets them a settlement or favorable court judgment, they still make enough money to live for years.
Also, remember, the real "patent trolls" aren't people at all, but companies like Microsoft, RIM, Apple and others, who apply for patents on technology that they know won't stand up in court, just to have leverage on smaller companies that can't afford to fight the long court battles these big companies can. That is the REAL abuse of our patent system, and I often think it is quite entertaining when some guy in his garage will go after these guys using their own game. Remember, RIM patented wireless email, the thumb keyboard, and a clickwheel for navigation, while both Microsoft and Apple have patented hundreds of things that in court would be thrown out for the existence of prior art if anyone ever had the cash to stand up to them.
I am no patent lawyer, but my humble suggestion would be not that we make it harder to keep or enforce a patent, but that we make it harder to get it in the first place by raising the standard of scrutiny and requiring a real panel of experts to vette the application, instead of rubber-stamping every application that is properly written and filed.
@Lloyd:
Now YOU owe someone money! Not for infringing a patent, but for the time it took to read that essay of yours. Time is money. KISS, k? lol, jk, etc. etc...
@ L.M. Lloyd...
"The problem is that there is no attempt made to check the validity of the patent before granting it."
You make a good point and a lot of other concerns about improving the current patent system, but wouldn't one way of checking the validity of a patent is to see something it's used in?
I understand that smaller companies don't have the cash flow or capital to fund a project based on a patent. But at issue here is the wait, which translates into the money they would receive if they won a lawsuit against a company.
Take RIM for example. I don't know all of the details of what when on, but I understood that the patent owner that sued the company had patented this years ago. Meanwhile, RIM has been around a long time, selling a product. Where was this person (I know he had passed away) and his estate when RIM started to produce the product? Why the wait? If the patent is that important to them, why not sue right away or at least when they realize this product contains patent infringement?
It's the "waiting for the payday" part that concerns me. Regardless of financial gain, isn't it the principal of the patent that should be the biggest issue?
Maybe I'm thinking more technically then financially.
Well ChillyWilly, in the particular case of the RIM vs. NTP mobile email patent, that is actually quite a case of divine justice. What the deal there is, there was this guy who did some of the early work on email over pagers for some products that really did go to market. Then, mobile email took of, and he really didn't think much about it, or follow anything up, just went on with his life. Then one day he read an article about how RIM was suing everyone, because they claimed to hold the patent on wireless email. He contacted them, to let them know that they were actually infringing on his patents. They brushed him off, and basically laughed at him, at which point he initiated legal action.
The whole point being, that had RIM not tried to patent wireless email, and then use that patent to drive other people out of business, he probably never would have sued them in the first place. Personally, if you legitimately invent something that really works, and are actually the first to do it, and can do it in a way that no one can improve on, then I think you have every right to "wait for a payday." A fantastic example of that would be the guy who invented the intermittent windshield wiper relay, and all the car companies had to pay him millions because they had used his technology without licensing it. The problem isn't people "waiting for a payday," it is these bogus patents that are granted on concepts and business methods like "one click shopping" or "a touchscreen interface for interacting with a phone" or "a multimedia device you can carry with you, that has a menu and can run programs." Those should not be patentable in the first place. You should have to be able to demonstrate a specific and technical innovation, and the method used to achieve that innovation. Patents were never supposed to cover concepts, they were supposed to cover actual physical inventions.
@L.M. Lloyd...
"You should have to be able to demonstrate a specific and technical innovation, and the method used to achieve that innovation. Patents were never supposed to cover concepts, they were supposed to cover actual physical inventions."
Agreed. And thanks for filling in the details on the RIM patent case.
Actually, the patent system SHOULD be mocked. It's been defunct for a very long time. It does far more to stagnate innovation than it does to encourage it.
Amazing
I patented the patent system.
Brilliant!
I patented patenting the patent system.
So there.
The problem with the patent office is the prodution system. I can almost bet that the examiner saw that the application had over 100 claims and crapped his/her pants. Patent Examiners get the same amount of time to examine all applications; whether they have 10 claims or 100 claims. Until this ancient system is changed don't expect the patent office to do any better.
Looking at the first claim, I can tell you it is most certainly not allowable, probably everyone who visits this blog could tell that as well.
Someone needs to patent patening!!!!!LOL
John already did, see post avobe (sorry, the word 4b0v3 with correct spelling is patented, can't write it)
Guys, have you even looked at what the patent has to say before criticizing it. You should take a look at the stuff Apple patents... absolute arse.
Agreed, those who patent stuff just to sue for it later and have no plans to productize it are hurting innovation but again, how do you prevent copycats ? Is there a better system. People just go around copying each others ideas. Apple should pay for using a 2 button mouse maybe.
Oh shut up. You know this is ridiculous.
Prevent copycats? you just answered your own question.
If the product you make is better, people with not buy something else.
People don't buy crap, they return it, and if the shop doesn't accept a return, you burn it down.