Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Sort of sounds like GPL, but for patents. Maybe this is the way to fix the patent system? Build huge portfolios that grant people use of them so long as they are not suing anybody for any payments they hold.



As someone who doesn’t know much about patents: what exactly would you sue someone for if they used a good-faith patent while not meeting the conditions of the good-faith clause?

How do you normally sue over a patent violation? Some estimation of damages in comparison to a hypothetical world where the patent wasn’t violated, then multiplied by some number so that it’s not worthwhile to violate patents constantly given that the court can’t prosecute every case?

It would seem as if the good-faith clause is basically asserting there aren’t damages in comparison to a world where the patent isn’t violated (or that usage is actually positive so long as it’s not used by someone who is collecting rent on their own patents.)


If Toyota acted in "bad-faith" by suing a third party (say Nissan) then Tesla could act to revoke their patent licenses to Toyota.

Once they had done so, it would be a standard patent infringement lawsuit between Tesla and Toyota.

This could be one path where you could enforce good-faith, IMHO IANAL.


Unfortunately this wouldn't stop anyone from transferring the patents to another legal entity that will grant the original company full right to use them but sue everybody else.


You could also make provisions to prevent that, as well.

If I cam granting use of my patent to you, I could request you put on a red fedora every day -- and if you fail to do so, then I will revoke you right to use the patent. You have to chose, put on that fedora, or don't use my patent. I guess you could chose to use the patent and be sued...

In any case, I am sure a document worded just right would either prevent that patent being used by a company who does not want to comply, or a lawsuit for violating the patent.

It could be simply put -- if you use this patent you may do so given the following. 1) You grant others the right to use your patents free of charge. 2) You don't sell your patents to any 3rd party.

I am sure there is some other things that might need to be covered.


Create two companies: one for using patents and one for suing!


Except almost worse. You can choose to not use a piece of GPL software. You might very well accidentally invent something simple that turns out to be patented.


How is it worse than if Tesla was aggressively perusing their patents? It's the patent system itself that you have a problem with. Tesla's patent sharing scheme only makes things potentially better for other inventors.


I suppose worse is a matter of perspective, but I think the OP is right that at some scale, someone could be dragged into this good faith deal, like it or not.

Independently invent something. Turns out it's already patented, within this good faith consortium. Now the only way to use it is by participating. Normally, this kind of thing results in getting sued for royalties.


I don't think they would be dragged into it. Just don't use any of the patents in the portfolio that has this clause. You had no right to use them before the clause.


Or negotiate a royalty.


> Normally, this kind of thing results in getting sued for royalties.

You have answered it. Free patent, GPL or not, you'd have this problem. And it's even worse on "normal" cases.


You might also very well accidentally write a piece of code that is not more than trivially different from some GPL code. In fact, I would argue that is much more likely.

I've contributed quite a few patches to open source projects, and sometimes if I'll review other patches I cannot tell the difference between code I've written or that others had written.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: