

An IP lawyer on patents, trolls, and entrepreneurship - VanL
http://www.inc.com/christina-desmarais/patents-an-ip-lawyer-dishes.html

======
stonefroot
What's really needed, in my opinion, is a search engine to track shell
companies. The lawyer interviewed is shooting from the hip when he says it is
"a shell game".

Without the use of shell corporations the patent trolling game becomes much
more difficult. In programmer lingo, it makes it "non-trivial". Using a system
of shell corporations and hiding behind them makes patent trolling much more
feasible as a pure play and makes it possible to do at scale, as Intellectual
Ventures does.

If we pick up the shell and reveal the cretins hiding underneath, it would
have a real effect on patent trolling. I can say this with 100% certainty.

Maybe even a more profound effect than making prior art easier to locate.

------
finkin1
Great info. Thanks!

------
davidpayne11
Sad, that no one is talking about Apple when referencing to abuse of patents,
especially.

~~~
VanL
I am conflicted about Apple. In one way, they are using their patents exactly
as intended under the system: They innovated, disclosed their innovations in a
patent (and I have looked at a few, the disclosures are pretty good, as
patents go), and they are now using their patents to fend off "copycats" in
the marketplace. I am much more sympathetic to Apple because they are actually
bringing products embodying their innovations to market.

There are a couple of problems, though. First, note the quotes around
copycats. I don't think that there was wholesale copying as Apple alleges. I
am sure there was some ... "creative inspiration" that Samsung et al. picked
up from Apple. In return, though, iOS has picked up a number of improvements
directly from Android and/or competing phone manufacturers.

Second, Apple innovated - but their innovations, IMO, were mostly in the area
of packaging. Packaging something better than anyone else _is_ innovation. I
am not sure that better packaging is _invention,_ however, and I am not sure
that it is (or should be) covered by the patent system.

~~~
neya
Exactly. But certain patents like you say shouldn't have been allotted in the
first place - Rounded corners, Slide to unlock, and so on..

I'm reminded of this funny image that was trending on G+ recently:
[http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/10...](http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/10/slide-to-unlock-550x403.jpg)

~~~
tankbot
Hah! That image is great. Oddly enough though, my initial reaction is to
support Apple's claim for slide to unlock but scoff at them for "rounded
corners."

I'm not sure why, I guess because rounded corners seem so obvious while slide
to unlock is pretty ingenious, if derivative.

~~~
SkyMarshal
Rounded corners _are_ obvious. Steve Jobs himself famously demonstrated prior
art:

[http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&s...](http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Round_Rects_Are_Everywhere.txt)

