I see where you're coming from, but we don't just need more people fighting to invalidate patients, we need the right people fighting to invalidate patents.
A lost case just provides more ammo for the trolls, making it harder for those who follow.
This isn't about rewarding companies for settling by letting them get their money back if the patent is invalidated. It's about killing the viability of the mass-lawsuit, quick settlement patent troll model.
These companies use patients like lotto tickets, and a lot of them "get lucky." However if these trolls constantly have a axe hanging over their ill-gotten gains, they may think twice before trolling.
While I'm completely opposed to these three-strikes rules, I think some good can come from New Zealand's passage of this law.
The world needs to see the vast and far reaching the consequences. When public wifi dries up, and businesses lose their connections, the failure will be crystal clear. Fingers crossed, I'm hoping that one or two of the lawmakers who voted for the law will have their connection severed.
It's theft in the same way that lining a bird cage with newspaper is theft.
Kendrick's argument it beyond unsubstantiated. Every time he used the word "theft," I kept thinking, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means."
But Will They Pinky Swear?
A standard security minimum would be put in place and there would no longer be any incentive to compete on security.
All participants could leak with impunity so long as they checked all of the boxes.
Prism!
Excellent use of the word, "prism."
Well done sir.
Re: Re: Re: Why - why not
I see where you're coming from, but we don't just need more people fighting to invalidate patients, we need the right people fighting to invalidate patents.
A lost case just provides more ammo for the trolls, making it harder for those who follow.
Re: Why - why not
Or they don't have the money to fight.
When you defend yourself in court, you have to have the cash to pay for an attorney who can win. Usually not cheap.
Then you have to pay for the appeal. It's inevitable.
If you lose, you're then on the hook for the loss as well. This is a deep pockets game.
Lastly if you cut corners and bring anyone but the best attorney to court, you're going to lose at create more case-law that favors the patent trolls.
This stuff is a lot more murky than you're making it sound.
Re: Troll Settlement Recouping
This isn't about rewarding companies for settling by letting them get their money back if the patent is invalidated. It's about killing the viability of the mass-lawsuit, quick settlement patent troll model.
These companies use patients like lotto tickets, and a lot of them "get lucky." However if these trolls constantly have a axe hanging over their ill-gotten gains, they may think twice before trolling.
I am Spartacus!
I love this show!
In my mind Carreon is associated with incompetence and douchbaggery because his actions are clearly the result of incompetent douchbaggery.
I want him to keep digging. I can't wait for the next episode!
Maybe this is good
While I'm completely opposed to these three-strikes rules, I think some good can come from New Zealand's passage of this law.
The world needs to see the vast and far reaching the consequences. When public wifi dries up, and businesses lose their connections, the failure will be crystal clear. Fingers crossed, I'm hoping that one or two of the lawmakers who voted for the law will have their connection severed.
It's theft in the same way that lining a bird cage with newspaper is theft.
Kendrick's argument it beyond unsubstantiated. Every time he used the word "theft," I kept thinking, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means."
Re: Greek Fire
My first thought when I read the article was Greek Fire.