
Tesla is hit by $2B patent troll case from Nikola Motors - dsr12
https://electrek.co/2018/05/02/tesla-semi-patent-troll-nikola-motors-design/
======
mrw34
Musk's comments from yesterday's earnings call:

"We have a slight laughable lawsuit recently from some company ironically
called Nikola. Nikola is suing Tesla. That's hilarious. Fate loves irony. But
they're suing us because the way the trucks look, which is absurd. Nobody's
buying a Semi truck because the way it looks, or because going to wraparound
windshield or whatever. Please."

[https://seekingalpha.com/article/4169027-tesla-
tsla-q1-2018-...](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4169027-tesla-
tsla-q1-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=12)

~~~
maccard
> But they're suing us because the way the trucks look, which is absurd.
> Nobody's buying a Semi truck because the way it looks, or because going to
> wraparound windshield or whatever. Please."

Whether that's true or not, it has absolutely no bearing on the validity of
the lawsuit.

~~~
mlevental
doesn't it? does this kind of thing depend on exactly whether whatever
characteristic was copied/stolen is actually responsible for any of the
revenue/purchasing?

~~~
DannyBee
No. That is at best a question of damages, not infringement.

~~~
sdhgaiojfsa
I think, for most people, the damages are all that matter. Whether you are
theoretically infringing on something is not what you lose sleep at night
over. It's whether you're going to be sued and lose a lot of money.

~~~
dragonwriter
> I think, for most people, the damages are all that matter.

They certainly aren't all that matters legally, because damage awards aren't
the obly remedy in patent cases, injunctive relief is available.

> It's whether you're going to be sued

While damages effect the risk that you will be sued, Tesla is in fact being
sued here.

> and lose a lot of money.

Sure, but damages aren't the only costly outcome. In this case, an injunction
that forces a non-infringing redesign would be expensive for Tesla even before
considering any damage award.

------
monochromatic
How is this a patent troll? Nikola isn’t a non-practicing entity. They have
their own competing product.

Was the Apple-Samsung patent litigation “patent trolling?”

~~~
jacquesm
It doesn't matter if they are a practicing entity or not: they are still
clearly using their patents in a trolling fashion. After all: (1) who had ever
heard of 'Nikola' before this, (2) these patents are too dumb for words, (3)
good luck showing $2B in damages and (if any) and (4) if you really believe
that Nikola is now associated with Tesla because of battery fires then you're
silly. These people are patent trolls pure and simple, that they do other
stuff besides doesn't really matter.

Oh, and these patents shouldn't have been granted in the first place, they are
design patents, and the design is right along the lines of other futuristic
looking trucks that still look like trucks.

~~~
TFortunato
>"who had ever heard of 'Nikola' before this"

I mean, apparently some large companies like Anheuser-Busch, (people who
actually buy trucks) have heard of them, if they announced they are buying up
to 800 of them from Nikola...

That said, I do agree that these (and a LOT of design patents) are
questionable at best, but I don't have any skin in the game when it comes to
the trucking industry.

~~~
jacquesm
With 0 risk they could state they will buy 10000 of them and it would be worth
just as much. You can go on their website and reserve 100 of them with
absolutely no commitment on your end. And it's anybody's guess what will
happen three years down the line (which is when they say they will start
delivering vehicles, small detail, they still need to build a factory, but
they did have a functional prototype).

------
LukeShu
For those wanting to evaluate whether they think the Tesla Semi infringes on
the patents, the 3 patents are:

U.S. Pat. D811,944 (issued March 6, 2018) on fuselage shape [http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/44/119/D08/0.pdf](http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/44/119/D08/0.pdf)

U.S. Pat. D811,968 (issued March 6, 2018) on wrap windshield [http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/68/119/D08/0.pdf](http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/68/119/D08/0.pdf)

U.S. Pat. D816,004 S (issued April 24, 2018) on side doors [http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/04/160/D08/0.pdf](http://pimg-
fpiw.uspto.gov/fdd/04/160/D08/0.pdf)

~~~
walrus01
How you can patent the shape of a fuselage is nuts, when it should be easy to
show prior art for wind tunnel work by others going back to the early 1950s.

~~~
OedipusRex
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act#Title_V:_Vessel_Hull_Design_Protection_Act)

~~~
ChickeNES
Holy shit, I thought you were just linking to the article on the DMCA at
first. (The link is to a subsection: "Title V: Vessel Hull Design Protection
Act")

------
Gustomaximus
If I was a shareholder in Nikola Id be worried. A new company should be
focused on making great products and innovating. Getting into the patent suing
game for what seemed to me to be trivial design elements seems like someone is
distracted.

Maybe they did it for a little attention and feel the cost is worth it...

~~~
dmode
If they did it for a little attention that is even dumber. All this will bring
is negative attention as the article headline suggests. They have already been
branded patent trolls

------
jessemoeller
The author here appears to be confusing design patents with regular patents. A
design patent covers the specific appearance of a product, functioning more
like a trademark than a patent for an invention. The relevant matters here
would be whether the appearance is similar enough to cause confusion, not
whether anyone has ever used a wrap windshield before.

That being said, I do agree that they look nothing alike, so I would not
expect this to be a very strong suit.

------
perpetualcrayon
As soon as you admit to yourself that all vehicles must have certain features
that "overlap" (such as the requirement of having a windshield on the front of
the vehicle so the driver can view the road in front of them, aerodynamic
properties), you quickly realize those 2 pictures at the top of the article
look nothing alike. All press is good press? I get the feeling if that was the
goal here it's going to backfire badly for Nikola Motors.

------
DannyBee
Just to note: These are design patents, not utility patents. They protect look
and feel. IE you'd only infringe by having a windshield that looks the same,
not a windshield that does the same thing or operates the same way, but looked
different than the protectable parts.

~~~
LukeShu
Am I correct in thinking that since a design patent protects ornamental
design, then if a design is necessary for functional reasons, the design
patent doesn't protect it? That you couldn't design patent a wheel looking
like a circle, because that is a necessary part of its utility?

Because the filed complaint itself seems to admit that the protected fuselage
shape is necessary to achieve the ~0.37 drag coefficient that both vehicles
have, which it also admits is necessary to attain appropriate range on EVs of
this class.

~~~
DannyBee
That is correct, it does not protect functional portions, but it's fairly
nuanced.

[https://www.wintechblog.com/2016/04/functional-features-
in-d...](https://www.wintechblog.com/2016/04/functional-features-in-design-
patents/) is some recent caselaw on this

------
mrleiter
I have almost no knowledge of patent law, but calling this a troll case seems
a bit naive. If it comes down to market confusion, than probably this won't
stick, because as mrw34 said - nobody buys a truck for it's look, or at least
no serious share of the electric semi truck market I think.

But if the major deciding issue in a patent case is whether or not a feature
of a patented product infringes on another feautre of a patented product -
then this could very well be serious.

~~~
heavenlyblue
The Nicola Motors allows you to reserve up to 20 trucks in exchange for your
e-mail address and $0.

I don't think they're really building anything.

------
Grue3
Would be even funnier if they were called Edison Motors.

------
cmurf
Why are these designs patented? Design and art usually fall under copyright.

------
joering2
Can we remove “patent troll” from the title.m? Thats a bias! Not every lawsuit
against patent is trolling!

~~~
ovao
The title of the article matches the title of the submission, which is usually
HN policy.

