
Patent Troll Forced To Settle Frivolous Lawsuit Against One-Man Business - ghshephard
http://www.marco.org/2013/08/08/lodsys-honest-headline
======
chasing
Thank you. This is a good clarification.

I believe attaching the names of people like Nathan Myhrvold to this is key.
Being associated with him and Intellectual Ventures needs to be seen as an
embarrassment. (Think of how people react to Zynga.) Myhrvold's clearly
interested in being some sort of public icon of brilliance, given his cooking
books, appearance on the Colbert Report, and Intellectual Ventures inclusion
in the (not so good) SuperFreakonomics book. Take that away from him.

Or, at least, make the patent trolling stuff such a giant part of his public
persona that the other stuff won't override it. So every article prints his
name as "Nathan Myhrvold, noted patent troll..."

This isn't a total solution, but we've got to run people's names through the
mud who do this. Especially to make the bar higher for scumbags who are
considering getting into this line of work. Really make them think about what
they're giving up.

~~~
NelsonMinar
There's a whole lot of names to attach to Intellectual Ventures; Myhrvold is
only the most visible. Their list of Senior Inventors may be particularly
interesting to Hacker News members. I don't think there's any "run through the
mud" here, I imagine these folks are all proud of their work at Intellectual
Ventures.

Here's what's on IV's site today at
[http://www.intellectualventures.com/index.php/inventor-
netwo...](http://www.intellectualventures.com/index.php/inventor-
network/senior-inventors)

Bran Ferren: Co-Chairman, Applied Minds, Inc. • Daniel Hillis: Co-Chairman and
Chief Technology Officer, Applied Minds, Inc. • Leroy Hood: Co-Founder and
Director, Institute for Systems Biology • Muriel Ishikawa: Senior Scientist
and Inventor • Robert Langer: Institute Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology • John Latham: Emeritus Professor, University of Manchester, U.K. •
Eric Leuthardt: Neurosurgeon & Biomedical Engineer • Roy Levien: Co-Founder
and Consulting Inventor, Rax • Mark Malamud: Co-Founder & Consulting Inventor,
Rax • John Pendry: Professor, Imperial College London • John Rinaldo: User
Interface Architect • David Smith: Augustine Scholar & Professor, Duke
University • Thomas Weaver: Senior Interviewer, Fannie and John Hertz
Foundation • Chuck Whitmer: Software Architect • Richard Zare: Blake Wilbur
Professor, Stanford University

~~~
zimpenfish
What are the odds of there being two distinct John Lathams at Manchester Uni?
Sadly the IV/JoLat is a Climate wonk, not the loveable CS wonk I was lectured
by (many years ago.)

~~~
willthames
I was immensely disappointed to see his name there, and then heartened to see
your reply. He was pretty much the person who most made me want to choose
Manchester for CS.

~~~
peterstjohn
It's been over 13 years since I graduated and I still remember his varied and
wonderful choice of trousers ;).

------
VengefulCynic
In a world where journalists had unlimited research budgets and the time to
run facts to ground, this sort of campaign to link Myhrvold's "good" name to
his patent-trolling deeds would be unnecessary. But since we don't live in
that world, I suppose the next best thing is to make sure to SEO Myhrvold's
name so that it always turns up "scum", "patent troll", and "extortionist".
Who knew you could do so much for journalism by priming the Google pump for
future journalists?

------
jonahx
Can someone explain to me why the former CTO of Microsoft, a person I assume
was quite wealthy already, would become an infamous patent troll? Is he just
trading his reputation and karma for.... an even bigger pile of money? Maybe
I'm naive, but that seems bizarre.

~~~
wmf
Here's a totally speculative hypothesis: He started IV as a sort of Xerox PARC
that would also make money; the idea was to hire really smart researchers,
advance the state of the art, and license the results to other companies to
productize. This didn't work (perhaps the research was low-value because it
was disconnected from the needs of the market, or perhaps technology transfer
is really hard) and rather than admit defeat they pivoted into patent
trolling.

~~~
jonahx
Thanks, this seems plausible. Is it possible that they've actually convinced
themselves they are doing something justifiable with their own IP? I'd find
that hard to believe, but who knows?

~~~
wmf
I've noticed that there are definitely people who think ideas — even
unimplemented ones — are valuable IP and patents are a reasonable way to
monetize ideas. It's sometimes expressed as a business model for those who
can't afford to execute their ideas. I guess the line between that philosophy
and patent trolling is when the inventor starts going after companies that
independently reinvented their idea.

------
adolph
Lodsys is part of Intellectual Ventures, really? It makes sense, but I guess
I'll have to listen to the podcast to find the citation.

~~~
NelsonMinar
It's widely believed that Lodsys is somehow affiliated with Intellectual
Ventures, but US corporate law makes it hard to really know who owns or
benefits from Lodsys' lawsuits. Intellectual Ventures is known to participate
in a lot of shell corporations and intellectual property trades. EFF notes
that Intellectual Ventures used to own some of the patents Lodsys is
prosecuting: [https://www.eff.org/issues/faqs-lodsys-
targets](https://www.eff.org/issues/faqs-lodsys-targets)

Edit: here is a story about the Guardian trying to get Intellectual Ventures
go on the record about its relationship to Lodsys. (Spoiler: they couldn't.)
[http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/jul/27/intellectu...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/jul/27/intellectual-
ventures-myrhvold-patent-lodsys) . And here is Myhrvold saying that
Intellectual Ventures sold the patent to Lodsys, although he carefully avoids
saying anything about ongoing business terms between his company and Lodsys.
[http://features.slashdot.org/story/13/04/02/1926255/nathan-m...](http://features.slashdot.org/story/13/04/02/1926255/nathan-
myhrvold-answers-your-questions-live-qa-today-at-12-pm-pacific)

~~~
dia80
> US corporate law makes it hard to really know who owns or benefits from
> Lodsys' lawsuits

As the director of a UK company every time I here this I am simply
flabbergasted. In the UK all limited companies/partnerships accounts are a
matter of public record.

~~~
oijaf888
Even if they are through various UK dependencies like Jersey and the Cayman
Islands?

------
it_learnses
Here's the wikipedia article on Intellectual Ventures. Make sure it continues
to say they're patent trolls:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures)

------
tenpoundhammer
This is also a great indictment against our elected representatives who
represent the wealthy and powerful, not the people. If our reps truly were out
to serve the American people this would have been solved years and years ago.

------
thinkcomp
What is the exact nature of Lodsys's relationship to IV? I have done a lot of
research on trolls and IV and I am not aware of any connection at all. Basic
assignments aren't enough to claim IV's involvement.

~~~
throwawaykf02
Agreed. I suspect there's no significant relationship at all. As another
comment mentions, Lodsys used to have this page on their website, now only
found on archive.org:
[http://web.archive.org/web/20110618140937/http://www.lodsys....](http://web.archive.org/web/20110618140937/http://www.lodsys.com/1/post/2011/05/q-what-
is-dan-abelows-involvement-is-intellectual-ventures-behind-lodsys-or-
controlling-lodsys-in-some-way.html)

As an aside, the FTC is considering a special investigation "piercing the
corporate veil" to ferret out the real entities behind trolling operations. If
they do, I look forward to seeing their findings. My hunch is that they won't
find the usual suspects behind them, if they find any at all.

~~~
gruseom
A couple questions (I have no knowledge on this):

1\. Wouldn't your hunch have been equally applicable to Oasis? Yet we now know
that IV was behind them.

2\. If your hunch were correct, wouldn't it be in both Lodsys' and IV's
interests to unequivocally establish the facts?

~~~
throwawaykf02
Sorry for the late response, very infrequent logger-in:

1\. No, we really don't know IV was behind Oasis. I am guessing you assume
this because NPR reported IV gets 90% of profits. But note how they did not
prove or even outright state there was any controlling interest; they just
throw the 90% number out there and imply it, Glen Beck-style. The original
inventor also made millions off Oasis, but can you say he was "behind" Oasis
too? Unless there's a clear indication of control (which shell companies make
very hard to prove) it is just as likely a "share-cropping" operation as a
shell company. Something like the FTC probe is needed to prove anything either
way.

2\. IV has publicly stated at an FTC panel that (paraphrasing) they do not sue
under any name than their own. Now, that's not under oath, mind you, but
making such statements in front of a government panel holds some weight.
However, I do find it a bit odd that Lodsys put that denial on their website
and then removed it.

------
gojomo
I find it amazing that at this moment, there are zero Google hits for the
exact phrase ["Intellectually Dishonest Ventures"] or the variant
["Intellectual[ly Dishonest] Ventures"].

So at least there will be now.

------
pi-rat
Myhvold causes me serious confusion, love him and hate him at the same time.
You shouldn't be able to do so much cool stuff and also be a complete asshat.

------
aet
How many hours is $200k of defense? (roughly)

~~~
jfb
It's in the linked article:

"I’ve spent about 200 hours on the matter and Sabrina about another 80. My
comparable market hourly rate (partner at a top NYC patent firm) would be $750
and a comparable rate for Sabrina (senior associate at a top patent firm)
would be about $500."

~~~
aet
Okay, so that is equivalent to 1 person working 40 hour weeks for 7 weeks. So,
one person pulling $6K a day. ($1.5M/yr) I think you could find legal support
for less than that.

~~~
w3pm
Assuming they could maintain that for a full year, $6K a day is only 2.2MM.
Also keep in mind that these hotshots don't do much of the grunt work, they
offload it to any number of junior associates (which that hourly rate has to
cover, in addition to other business overhead). Still not a bad gig if you can
get it.

~~~
jfb
Keep in mind that a partner at a top firm who bills her time out at $750, is
making a lot more than that, due to the nature of a legal partnership.

------
chenster
The patent troll should be executed.

