
Twitter Launches Innovator’s Patent Agreement - Garbage
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/twitter-launches-innovators-patent-agreement
======
StavrosK
This sounds like a very good first step. I would also like to see a clause
that specifies that, when a third party assigns a patent to Twitter, they get
to use any of Twitter's patents for defensive purposes.

This would hopefully lead to many people assigning their patents to Twitter,
and thus being able to use any of the large pile of patents defensively. It
would be a very good deterrent for anyone suing them, yet would make them all
unable to use any of the patents to sue.

I'm not sure how enforceable it is, though.

~~~
Kliment
This is exactly how Intellectual Ventures, one of the biggest if not the
biggest patent trolls of all time was started. We really, really do not need
another one of those fuckheads.

~~~
mcintyre1994
I can see why this could become dangerous, but the IPA would actually make it
appear surprisingly robust. Twitter have to have the inventor's permission to
use the patents offensively, so a huge war chest that basically acts like a
patent pool for a lot of people isn't actually a threat to those outside of it
unless all their inventors decide to allow patent trolling. They also couldn't
transfer them to a patent holding company to do that because the IPA holds
even if the patent is sold.

There are of course issues, but the idea proposed could actually be a major
turning point here. A patent pool that can only be used defensively is a very
interesting idea.

~~~
Kliment
Yes, but not in the hands of a single company. What happens if Twitter goes
bankrupt? Does whoever acquire the assets then hold the portfolio? Do the
terms of the agreement bind them? I like the idea, but having Twitter play
that role is too fragile.

~~~
atebits
Yes, the IPA is bound to future owners of the patents. (It would be trivial to
get around if it wasn't).

And to clarify: the goal of the IPA isn't to make Twitter or any one company
some blessed repository of patents. The goal is for many companies to adopt
the IPA as a promise between them and their engineers.

~~~
Kliment
How does that actually become legally binding? If the patents are assigned to
Twitter, and are later transferred to an entity that never agreed to the IPA,
what actually happens? I honestly have no idea how it would work out.

And I fully agree about the IPA's goal, I'm protesting against people saying
that it should be treated as a benevolent patent pool now. On the whole, I
think the entire patent bullshit is moronic and should be annihilated at first
opportunity, but that's a different story.

~~~
atebits
Check out section 4. If the assignee attempts to assert the patent improperly,
the inventor has the right to give out licenses. The inventor's rights are
permanent, not a function of who happens to own the patent.

