When All Else Fails, Litigate For Patent Infringement
from the rewarding-the-losers dept
Tim Lee, over at the Technology Liberation Front, is pointing to the latest story about Transmeta suing Intel for patent infringement, where he notes that it's a case of the market loser litigating. This is an issue we've discussed in the past, but it's a good example to highlight. One of the points of patent protection is to add incentives for innovation, encouraging companies to invest in a space, knowing that if they succeed, they have some protectionist policies allowing them to hold a monopoly for a period of time. However, it's never quite clear why this kind of protection is necessary if the market gives all the incentives that are needed for innovation. One of the consequences of tinkering with the market, then, is that you get results that go against everything that "free marketers" should believe in. As with this case, it allows the company that failed in the market, because it failed to execute properly, to then come back and sue those who succeeded. This is the same thing that happened in the RIM-NTP case. NTP had completely failed in the market and did nothing but take millions away from the company that had executed properly. The market is there for a reason, and it rewards the companies that successfully deliver the product people want. In cases like this, patents allow the companies that screwed up to take money from those that succeed. It's difficult to understand how this is a good policy for promoting innovation.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
A prime example of idealism is...
Even now, they got such a headstart in the industry that the other providers are trying to make the same offer, but can't perfect it like Nextel has (instant connection time, as opposed to Verizon's 6 second connection time).
Now the technology is available for all players and it made more competition in the market, because now we have another choice as consumers to one which might not have been there if they hadn't innovated.
Unfortunately, they all can't be like this...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And what is the solution here? I'd like to see patents limited to such technologies that are believed to be experiencing limited innovation in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The system sucks.
But then what happens to the invintor that figures out how to do something, spends years working on it, then when he tries to take the product to market gets blown away by a Microsoft, ATT, GM, GE, or what-have-you who takes their years of work, adds it (in part or whole) to their own products and then devours the market share? (invintors aren't usualy the best at marketing, or product development, ya know?)
Shouldn't he get something for all his hard work?
But the current system is almost as bad as none at all because of all these patent infrigement cases (like RIM-NTP). Where sometimes, the patents aren't even any good. It's just ridiculous that people are still being so asinine, and some even seem to base their business on aquiring patents, and then sueing people who are actualy making use of the idea instead of just sitting on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The system sucks.
No one is entitled to something for their 'hard' work. Inventing something is one thing. Getting the market to accept is another.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Transmeta executed quite well, actually
In the computer world, landing a big deal with a large hardware reseller, like HP, Dell etc will make or break your company.
Unfortunately, Intel is rather like Microsoft in this area. Any new start up in the CPU market that directly competes against Intel is doomed. Transmeta was on the verge of landing deals more than a few times, but was always beaten by Intel.. who is basically willing to bribe companies with rediculous amounts of money for ad campaigns etc AS LONG as they dont make any deals with company X. Sorry, but thats not really legetimate competition, its bribery. Thats not the only reason transmeta has failed, but thats the biggest contributing factor I would imagine.
I will repeat: Any new start up that directly competes against Intel will fail. Transmeta learned the hard way.
Intel intentionally spoonfed AMD for years till they become a legitimate competitor, precisely so they avoid antitrust litigation. They basically have free reign to engage in all the monopolistic practices they want, with a managable competitor (although less so in the last couple years).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Transmeta executed quite well, actually
But the DOJ has no teeth when it comes to a company with the size and success of MSFT.
Anti-trust Laws only apply to those who won't be missed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Transmeta executed quite well, actually
Yep. Quite a few of AMD's chips would have never made it to market if it werent for Intel engineers helping them develop their product.
Make no mistake.. there was no benevolence in any of it.
Transmeta unfortunately, never got that kind of "love".. quite the opposite.
Mabye if Transmeta had gone the AMD route, and made an iferior product for a number of years at a cheaper price. Then ramp up your technology to compete on a more level playing feild. Coming out with something thats better, cheap and functional right out of the starting gate, I guess, didnt put them in Intel's good graces;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only why a company does well is BECAUSE they stole a patent and use dit to sell their product.
This is just patent bashing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Transmeta,AMD start seeing the light
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The system sucks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]