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

Excellent reference, thanks Van. This comment from the judge in the WSJ coverage[1] of Cisco ""It is enough for now to determine that Innovatio at least has a plausible argument that its infringement claims are still viable," wrote Judge Holderman. The "licensing campaign is therefore not a sham," he said." So did Innovatio include the patent numbers? I have read in other cases that legal test for extortion was "credible but not actionable" threat of exposure. (Crosby vs Upshaw as an example, she wouldn't provide paternity data)

FWIW I've added you to the list of technology companies being harmed by patent extortion (I try to keep my congressional representatives informed in order to disallow them the excuse that they had no idea how bad the problem is)

[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732490600457828...

Could I talk you into sharing that list?

I have been thinking I should be more proactive with my congresscritters. It seems I am always sending reactive messages.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact