patenttrolls
Latest
Supreme Court shuts down location loophole for patent suits
Patent trolls have had it pretty easy lately, especially in East Texas. A 2016 ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit allowed patent suits anywhere a defendant company's products are sold. The Eastern District of Texas has become a favorite of high-tech patent lawsuits thanks to its rapid litigation timetable and plaintiff-friendly rulings. The US Supreme court today may have put an end to such free-range suit practices, however. The justices involved in the patent case between TC Heartland and Kraft Foods ruled unanimously that patent suits can only be filed in courts located where the target company is headquartered.
Google fights patent trolls by giving away patents
Last year, Google and a handful of other technology companies banded together to fight patent trolls -- creating the License on Transfer Network (LOT). It's a pretty good system, effectively protecting LOT members from patent litigation by giving all participants a royalty-free license to any patent that leaves the LOT network. Now, Google wants to expand the network's ranks to include start-ups, and it's offering new members a pretty nice welcome package: free patents.
Judges have more discretion to punish patent trolls, but they probably won't
The US Supreme Court just gave judges a little more leverage to punish patent trolls: it defined the word "exceptional." A provision of federal patent law hinged on the definition of the word, stating that the court could charge a lawsuit's losing party with the winner's attorney fees in "exceptional cases." It sounds straightforward: if a lawsuit is obviously frivolous, the patent troll pays its victim's costs. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court said, precedent from a previous case left the rule with "an inflexible framework onto statutory text that is inherently flexible." In other words, it was too difficult to define exactly how exceptional a case was, making it nearly impossible to implement punitive fee-shifting.
White House offers new web tools to help fight patent trolls
The White House isn't relying solely on legislative measures to try and curb patent trolls; it's also giving the trolls' targets some online resources to defend themselves. To start, it just launched a USPTO website that tells victims what to do if they're served with infringement notices or subpoenas. Meanwhile, a future effort will crowdsource prior art to thwart suits over patents that should never have been granted in the first place. There's still more work ahead in the legal realm, including pro bono defense lawyers and technology training for patent examiners. However, the new online tools just might give smaller companies the know-how to fight back against trolls that prey on their lack of information.
Apple is now the undisputed No. 1 victim of all patent trolling
When you're one of the world's most valuable companies, it's not hard to find people hoping to lift a few bucks from your coffers by whatever means they can. And when it comes to patent trolling, the top target of patent trolls is none other than Apple, according to international law firm Winston & Strawn. A patent troll is an individual or company that buys patents for the sole purpose of using them to sue companies, while never using those patents for their own products or services. Apple has been attacked over patent claims ranging from how the iPhone's screen rotates to how iOS processes in-app payments, and while the company's legal team is able to squash the majority of these lawsuits, several have been successful. Patent trolls, also known as nonpracticing entities, are going after the largest companies because that's where the money is -- with the most popular products and the biggest markets, Steven D. Atlee, a partner with Winston & Strawn, tells TUAW. "A patent litigation can cripple a smaller company, and even some of the larger companies are spending a good chunk of their revenues defending against such claims," he said. And the money Apple is spending to defend against such litigation is climbing, as the number of lawsuits levied against the company by nonpracticing entities has skyrocketed from 18 in 2008 to 44 in 2012, according to data from Patent Freedom. But it's not all doom and gloom, and legislators are becoming aware that patent trolls are working solely in the interest of their own pocketbooks, rather than to actually protect the patent in question. "There are some changes in the courts and in the legislature which are making patent suits easier to defend," Atlee said. "It is no longer a given that the plaintiff will be able to get an injunction or court order barring the sale or importation of the accused product. Also, legislators are looking at rules which will make bringing patent cases more expensive and risky for the plaintiff." [via TechHive]
Patent challengers must prove they have a 'significant presence' in the US: ITC
The International Trade Commission has become increasingly tired of all the patent mischief it's forced to deal with, just as we've become tired of reporting on it. That's why its latest defense against time-wasters could potentially be a very good idea. According to Reuters, the ITC will soon demand upfront proof that the complainant in a patent case has a "significant presence in the United States" and isn't merely a fly-by-night outfit created for the purpose of pursuing litigation. The new rule has already been trialed in a pilot program, and Google, Intel, HP and others have voiced their support. It can't fix everything, of course, since major companies will still be able to game the system to hamper their rivals, but with the FTC and the White House also taking steps to subject "patent-assertion entities" to greater scrutiny, it feels like the wheels of government may be starting to catch up with the trolls.
FTC planning to take on patent trolls, hopes to reduce frivolous lawsuits
Sick of endless patent wars yet? According to the New York Times, so is the Federal Trade Commission. Referencing the usual persons briefed on the matter, the NYT reports that FTC chairwoman Edith Ramirez is preparing to propose an inquiry that will put patent-assertion entities -- companies that exist solely to buy and collect royalties on patents -- under federal scrutiny. If approved, patent trolls that catch the FTC's attention will need to detail how they operate and if their legal proceeds pay out to the original patent owner. The chairwoman is expected to explain the proposal in more detail at a patent law workshop later this week. According to the NYT, Ramirez doesn't have any specific company in mind, but aims to investigate companies that might hamper innovation. With any luck, the inquiry will help curb spurious litigation and rampant patent trolling -- something most of us can probably get behind.
Google lobs antitrust complaint against Microsoft, Nokia in EU, claims they're playing patent footsie (updated)
The gloves just came off at Google: the company has just filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Microsoft and Nokia. Its gripe accuses the two Windows Phone partners of playing dirty pool through handing 1,200 wireless-related patents to Mosaid, a Canadian firm which spends most of its time suing the industry over WiFi rather than making products. Microsoft and Nokia are allegedly hiking the prices of devices by "creating patent trolls" that bypass deals preventing them from suing directly, possibly steering a few companies towards picking Windows Phone instead of Android. Google argues that it's launching the complaint as an early defensive measure. Neither Microsoft nor Nokia has responded, although there's a degree of irony to the action: the complaints assert that Nokia is jeopardizing standards-based patents, but Google's recent acquisition Motorola has itself come under EU scrutiny for possibly abusing standards with its lawsuits against Apple and Microsoft. Either way, it's clear Google is concerned that Microsoft's Android patent licensing campaign might lose its decorum in the near future. Update: Nokia's decided to have its say, in an email to Reuters: "Though we have not yet seen the complaint, Google's suggestion that Nokia and Microsoft are colluding on intellectual property rights is wrong. Both companies have their own IPR portfolios and strategies and operate independently."
Intellectual Ventures' Nathan Myhrvold defends patent trolling, calls tech industry immature
Intellectual Ventures' CEO and founder Nathan Myhrvold, who previously spent some 14 years at Microsoft Research, took the stage here at D10, and as predicted, his interview with Walt Mossberg was quite the invigorating one. You may know the man and his company for its vicious patent trolling -- or, what appears to be patent trolling. In essence, a lot of its business comes from acquiring patent portfolios, and then licensing and / or suing companies to "enforce" them. Naturally, Nathan has a radically different perspective than most sane individuals on the matter, insisting that the system isn't necessarily broken, and that "making money from enforcing patents is no more wrong than investing in preferred stock." The talk centered predominantly around how Intellectual Ventures operates, what it does, and if its CEO feels that the "rat's nest of lawsuits" -- as Walt put it -- was getting out of control. Despite saying that his company has hundreds of people working on new inventions to help deliver medicines in Africa (in response to a question from the crowd on whether his outfit was truly helping people), he confessed that suing to enforce patents was simply another method of capitalism working. Care to take a ride on the crazy train? Head on past the break for a few choice quotes from the interview.
Kodak moves to block Apple's latest patent suit from proceeding in federal district court
In a move that's sure to surprise no one, Kodak is fighting Apple's latest round of patent litigation -- a suit that would force Kodak to pause plans to sell up to $2.6 billion in digital imaging patents as a condition of its bankruptcy loan. In documents filed late last week, Kodak argued the dispute should be heard by the same bankruptcy court that's already overseeing its insolvency proceedings. In fact, Kodak's bankruptcy filing back in January caused all pending litigation (from Apple and RIM, among others) to come to a screeching halt, but Apple is nonetheless pushing for a reboot, arguing it's the owner of "a number of valuable patents," including one that could be lost if that planned $2 billion sale goes through. So where might this legal catfight take place? A bankruptcy judge is expected to hear arguments from both sides on Thursday.
Watson now hunting down patent trolls, plans Ken Jennings' elaborate demise
The Watson supercomputer used its speech recognition, natural language processing, machine learning and data mining abilities to crush puny human Ken Jennings' dreams of winning at "Jeopardy!", but now Big Blue has it chasing down medical patent trolls for fun. Incorporating the Strategic IP Insight Platform, IBM has now programmed Watson to scan millions of pharmaceutical patents and biomedical journals to discover, analyze, and record any info pertaining to drug discovery. SIIP can then look for the names of chemical compounds, related diagrams, the company and scientist who invented and works with the compounds and related words to determine a patent's rightful owner. The SIIP function can also highlight which patents could be targeted for acquisition by trolls looking to control a property via a lawsuit or licensing agreement. Click past the break for a video outlining the project, along with Watson's announcement of its engagement to "Skynet".
Judge shoots down Personal Audio's second Apple infringement case
Talk about swift justice. It's been less than a week since we reported on Personal Audio's second infringement suit against Apple, and an East Texas judge has already put an end to the litigation. In a statement regarding the company's complaint that the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and latest generation iPods infringed on the same patents put forth in its initial suit, Judge Ron Clark said the $8 million already awarded to the plaintiff should do just fine. He went on to deny the company's request for a second trial. It may not be the last we hear of Personal Audio, but it is a refreshing change of pace from the usual goings on in Eastern District courtrooms.
Software to be unpatentable in New Zealand, Peter Jackson said to have some opinion on that
Oh, New Zealand, you country full of crazy cats. When will your zany ways end? Looks like the government of the country which produced Peter Jackson, famed director of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy will finalize a move to make software unpatentable via a Bill which would make that the law of the land (software patents do not exist in Europe, either). The basic argument here is that patent trolls -- and to some extent, patents in general -- stifle innovation and make it nearly impossible for software developers in the NZ to get their groove on. New Zealand's two largest software manufacturers, Jade and Orion, both support the banishment of such patents, so it'll be interesting to see just how awesomely creative future software developments from the country become. Either way, we doubt Jaron Lanier will ever be moving there.
Nintendo escapes patent troll in appeals court -- thanks to Sony
About, oh -- four years ago -- a little Texas company called Anascape sued Nintendo and Microsoft for ostensibly violating its controller patents. Microsoft settled. Nintendo didn't. Anascape won. One $21 million judgment, two years and countless legal bills later, Nintendo has finally emerged victorious over the patent troll. This week, a Federal Circuit Court overturned two earlier decisions, ruling that Nintendo's GameCube, WaveBird and Wii Classic Controllers don't violate Anascape's six-degrees-of-freedom patent, because Anascape only added that 6DOF claim to its patent in 2000... making Sony's original DualShock controller -- released in 1998 -- prior art. Game, set, match.
