
The Patent Troll: Making a fortune off other people's ideas - jakarta
http://www.good.is/post/the-patent-troll/
======
api
Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. A patent is a tool for doing 1%
of the work and then waiting for someone else to do the other 99% so you can
sue.

I'm being a bit extreme there... I think there should be something like a
patent. But, it should be very hard to get. Maybe only 1% of current patents
should have been allowed. It might be lower than that.

A patent should only be allowed on something fundamental, conceptual, highly
novel, and unprecedented, and there should be a significant burden of proof on
the patenter to prove all that.

~~~
mmt
_A patent should only be allowed on something fundamental, conceptual, highly
novel, and unprecedented, and there should be a significant burden of proof on
the patenter to prove all that._

Agreed, except I would substitute "tangible" for "conceptual," as the current
laxness in the system could, arguably, be attributed to a departure from a
tangibility requirement.

------
sliverstorm
> Spangenberg argues that companies such as Microsoft and Ford know patent
> negotiation is one of the costs of doing business.

I really, really hate this argument. "This negative thing is accepted as
inevitable, so why is it bad that I am proactively part of that negative
thing?". I don't know how to explain why, but I do know it screams complete
and total lack of ethics, only justification.

I'm just waiting for another patent troll to troll one of his legitimate
businesses.

~~~
j_baker
It's rationalization:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28making_excus...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28making_excuses%29)

The statement is just as much a way of convincing himself that what he's doing
is right as it is a way to convince anyone else. It's like a murderer who
justifies murder by saying "They were going to die sometime anyway." People
don't want to live with the knowledge that they're bad, so they come up with
justifications for it.

------
AlisdairO
When it comes down to it, patent trolls are only a symptom of the real problem
- the fact that far too many obvious patents are granted. If the only patents
granted were ones that companies would be unlikely to come up with of their
own accord when they faced a given problem, patent trolls would be
substantially less common, and more justifiable.

~~~
shasta
Exactly. If it makes business sense to wait for someone to accidentally
infringe on your patent, you clearly shouldn't have that patent.

~~~
AlisdairO
Very well put! I shall be snagging that line for future use, if you don't
mind.

------
kljensen
This is an entertaining and timeless story. "Trolling" is, alas, inevitable
due to the transferable nature of patent rights. (Troll-like cases are perhaps
1/20 of patent infringements filed.) But, the victims of trolling are not
entirely without blame -- small inventors and start ups are frequently told to
"scram" by large companies when they are informed of their potential
infringement. Without a bankroll, contingency litigation is the only option
for the small guy.

~~~
mustpax
The problem surrounding the current patent regime is not that those being sued
are blameless, it's that patents do not encourage innovation anymore. As you
stated, companies that actually bring products to market are not ideally
suited to launch patent lawsuits.

Only non-practicing entities (i.e. patent "trolls") can sue with great abandon
because they don't sell anything that they could be counter-sued for.

------
gamble
They call it patent trolling; I call it poetic justice.

The companies that are extorted by patent trolls are the same group that
agitated for today's over-broad patent system in the hope that they could wall
out smaller competitors with thickets of mutually cross-licensed defensive
patents. They created the conditions for parasites to thrive - now they have
to live with the consequences.

...or they could support patent reform.

~~~
alecco
I disagree completely. The biggest patent bullies have a gigantic portfolio to
kill or milk any possible competitor. In particular some of the big software
houses. Patent trolls don't bite IBM/Microsoft/Oracle just like piranhas don't
prey on each other. They go attack/bully weaker prey. Most patent trolls seem
to rarely go against any corporation with a big legal team/budget.

IBM vs. Sun: <http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/044.html> (It's great this
was published on Forbes, else I'd be dismissed as a waco lefty, just like
their reporting on Enron at about the same time.)

~~~
gamble
Is that true? The troll in this article seemed to be going up against some
major companies. I'm no lawyer, but it seems like if you're looking for
8-figure payoffs it would be better to hit up companies for whom that's a
minor expense, not an existential threat.

------
mcantor
I would draw a distinction between patent trolls who target multi-million
dollar companies, and patent trolls who target small independent entrepreneurs
who are crushed by the litigation.

~~~
donaldc
I'm going to guess that there are very few patent trolls that target small
independent entrepreneurs. Not out of the goodness of their heart, but simply
because that isn't where the money is.

