Patent Troll Attorney Licensed Patents To Be Used Against His Own Firm's Clients

from the gotta-keep-the-company-busy dept

Fri, Oct 19th 2007 6:22pm — Mike Masnick

Within the patent attorney/patent trolling world, there's been a story gathering steam over the last couple months that seems to only get more bizarre every week. It started, simply enough, at the beginning of September when a company, which was just formed a few months ago, called Illinois Computer Research, sued Google for patent infringement. The patent in question (which amusingly enough, can be found hosted at Google) is officially for "Enhancing touch and feel on the internet". The details show that it's really just describing how you might represent a book online -- and, in fact, the lawsuit points to Google's book scanning project as being infringing. There's nothing all that interesting there, other than yet another case of a company doing nothing suing a company that's doing quite a bit of innovating using an overly broad an obvious patent. However, at the end of the article linked above there's a small aside that has turned out to be much more important: "The inventor listed on the patent is Scott C. Harris of San Diego, Calif. Presumably, he is the same Scott C. Harris listed as a Principal in the San Diego office of Fish & Richardson P.C, a patent prosecution firm." From that, you would probably assume that Fish and Richardson was behind ICR's lawsuit. In fact, you'd be wrong. Google is actually a Fish & Richardson client... whereas ICR is represented by Niro, Scavone, a firm that has fought against Fish & Richardson quite a bit.

Then the details started to come out. It appears that a top partner at Fish & Richardson was filing for patents on the side and then licensing them out to patent trolls, often so that they would then sue companies -- including companies represented by his own employer, Fish & Richardson. Now, I know I said that I'm not a fan of the term "patent troll," but in this case it appears completely warranted, as the very same Scott Harris happens to run a website (currently taken down) called ImAPatentTroll.com. If he's okay with it, then I see no reason not to use it to describe him. Fish & Richardson fired Harris, but the story doesn't end there. Illinois Computer Research isn't just suing Google... it's also suing Fish & Richardson for supposedly trying to get Harris to get it to drop the suit. Now, Fish & Richardson has filed quite a response, claiming that Harris used company time, equipment and resources to file for a bunch of patents -- and then, rather than just licensing or selling those patents, would work out special deals with the companies he licensed the patents to, allowing him (personally) to get a cut of any legal wins those firms get in suing for infringement. He even would point out firms that might be infringing on the patent. Many of the negotiations for those relationships were done using his Fish & Richardson email -- even one email discussion that pointed out that Google (again, an F&R client who Harris had even done some work for) was potentially infringing on Harris' patent and could be a good target for a lawsuit. Welcome to the lovely world of patent extortion, where the money from the practice is so lucrative that one of the highest paid lawyers at a top law firm would quietly license his patents to be used against his own firm's clients in exchange for a cut of the profits.

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

Filed Under: patent attorneys, patent trolls, patents
Companies: fish & richardson, google

27 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2007 @ 7:20pm

Dick the Butcher: The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sal, 19 Oct 2007 @ 9:12pm

If I was a Satan loving extortionist it'd be perfectly sensible to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Max Powers at http://ConsumerFight.com, 19 Oct 2007 @ 9:36pm

Typical Corporate Behavior
What a story! Another case of greed at it's best. I hope the guy winds up in a hole in the desert. Of course if it was me that got caught that would be a different story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob Johnson, 20 Oct 2007 @ 6:09am

Ethics in the legal profession...
Obviously, this troll didn't follow the basic tenets of ethics in the legal system. It pisses me off because this is the type of behavior that gives lawyers a horrible name. There's lots of money to be made in any area of law if you're willing to skirt any ethical standards and greed helps lawyers do this. There are lawyers out there who do quite well for themselves and are ethical, but it takes a TON of hard work to do it. It appears that this troll just didn't want to do the work or spend the time...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2007 @ 8:04am
  
  Re: Ethics in the legal profession...
  There's lots of money to be made in ANY profession if you're willing to be crooked. Not just law.
  
  Even politics - but don't get me started . . . :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Idiot Savant, 11 Jan 2008 @ 4:22pm
    
    Re: Re: Ethics in the legal profession...
    Harris and Fish & Richardson were made for each other. Fish & Richardson can screw people with the best of 'em.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2007 @ 3:24pm
  
  Re: Ethics in the legal profession...
  Obviously, this troll didn't follow the basic tenets of ethics in the legal system.
  Huh? You're kidding, right? That's not how business works, except for loosers.
  
  It pisses me off because this is the type of behavior that gives lawyers a horrible name.
  Well, I ADMIRE him! You should give "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand a read sometime. Or maybe not. The world needs dumb "nice guys" to feed the smart ones.
  
  It appears that this troll just didn't want to do the work or spend the time...
  He was just smarter than that. Can't blame him for not being stupid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2007 @ 4:38pm
    
    Re: Re: Ethics in the legal profession...
    i think you need to read that book again...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alfred E. Neuman, 20 Oct 2007 @ 8:20am

Wow
Queue Angry Dude in 3 .. 2 .. 1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Schmitt, 20 Oct 2007 @ 8:52am

Litigation Industry
All other industries are highly regulated and have all sorts of government organizations overseeing them (OSHA, FDA, EPA, etc.). When is the litigation industry going to start to be regulated too? I realize that there might only be 10% out there doing such things, but isn't that enough to warrant regulation for this industry?
Oh, wait... the lawyers would be helping to regulate it. Damn.
I just think it is very interesting that lawyers organize seminars that other lawyers come to in order to learn the strategies of how to sue. Ever see those commercials on TV regarding Mesothelioma, taking phen-phen, or other class-action suits that spend lots of money for TV time? Part of the litigation industry...
Say anything about it, and you might get sued.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- HowdyDoD, 17 Nov 2007 @ 2:29pm
  
  Regulation
  It sounds like Scott Harris is about to get "regulated" in court for the next 10 years.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Oct 2007 @ 1:55pm

How can you try to make a scumbag feel guilty when they proudly set up a website announcing their pride in what they do?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It may be overgeneralizing but Attorneys produce absolutely NOTHING of concrete value to society other than interpretation of its laws, which, in many cases, is twisted to attorneys whims. Why law is included among the noble professions is beyond me.

If 90% of all doctors were to suddenly die tomorrow it would be a crisis.

If 90% of attorneys died.....?

pfft
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Willton, 21 Oct 2007 @ 7:57am
  
  Re:
  If 90% of attorneys died.....?
  
  There would be anarchy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2007 @ 8:51am
  
  Re:
  
  If 90% of attorneys died.....?
  
  the remaining 10% would sue us into oblivion. They would claim copyright, trademark, and patent infrigement somehow and would sue for ungodly amounts of money in order to compensate their "irreparable damages".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nicolo M., 20 Oct 2007 @ 3:34pm

Rewards
If screwing people over is so bad, then why does society reward people so well for it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Cynic, 20 Oct 2007 @ 6:56pm
  
  Re: Rewards
  Actually, society is just lousy at punishing people for screwing other people over, but it does. This will seem a digression but it really is on topic: a magazine I won't name (for fear of copyright, but you can guess its name) once pointed out that many pilots crash and die for doing things they have done many times before, but sadly got away with it. Society is like airplanes, forgiving up to a point, but when it hits the fan, watch out. So in my opinion it's not so much "society's" fault for not consistently punishing jerks that keep breaking the rules, but rather their own faults for not seeing the eventual end to which their actions are leading (or, their family and friends for looking the other way, but that's not always the case...some people you just can't talk sense to).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - QuoteMark, 21 Oct 2007 @ 4:29am
    
    Re: Re: Rewards
    Hmmm...yes we are a lazy pack of losers, aren't we. Our society is the equivalent of a dumb hick watching the Jerry Springer Show!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2007 @ 9:26am
    
    Re: Re: Rewards
    Actually, society is just lousy at punishing people for screwing other people over, but it does.
    Punishes them by making them rich. The world's greatest fortunes were built by screwing people over. Just ask the Native Americans.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Asian, 20 Oct 2007 @ 4:11pm

Re: rewards
with all the money google has ... cant it just get a few people " shipped off to the moon" or buried 6 ft under
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
kneeL, 21 Oct 2007 @ 9:00am

they did what now
I got lost at the part where you said "Fish". It gets fairly confusing after that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
west, 21 Oct 2007 @ 9:02am

Open Source Law
ALTLAW.ORG
a frayed knot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stephan Hall, 21 Oct 2007 @ 2:49pm

Attorneys
Nothing new here. Attorneys have arranged the legal system so that they can legally extort money from society. It's sort of like welfare for the law profession. They suck from society. How about some real late breaking new!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stephan Hall, 21 Oct 2007 @ 3:06pm

Attorneys
Nothing new here. Attorneys have arranged the legal system so that they can legally extort money from society. It's sort of like welfare for the law profession. They suck from society. How about some real late breaking news!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Chicken, 22 Oct 2007 @ 7:11am

Is it ever OK for a patent attorney to be an inven
What about a different set of facts.

Assume a patent attorney:

a) invents a chemical process,

b) expressly informs his law firm about his interest in setting up a chemical company,

c) engages independent patent counsel outside his firm to represent him,

d) engages his law firm to represent his company (thus seeking to avoid conflicts),

e) actively seeks venture capital to become a producer rather than a troll,

f) has never represented a client in the same area of technology,

g) at the time of invention, no firm clients had been involved in even the same general area of technology.

Is this acceptable? Or is it inherently bad because a patent attorney is seeking to be an innovator?

If you can't guess why I'm asking, it's because I am that guy. I set up a company, after informing my law firm of my interests in doing so. My company is trying to raise funds to set up a production facility. I'm still maintaining a full-time position at the firm, and all of my clients are in totally unrelated technologies.

I'm curious to hear what my patent colleagues would say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt Bennett, 23 Oct 2007 @ 9:58am

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure this constitutes a breach of Harris's Fiduciary Responsibility to his employer at the time, Google, and his clients more generally, and it's exactly the sort of thing that will get you disbarred.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
terrified of anarchy, 31 Oct 2007 @ 12:50pm

JAPAN: CESSPIT OF ANARCHY
USA: 1 attorney per ~500 people
JAPAN: 1 attorney per ~10k people

It's too bad about Japan, what with the anarchy, blood in the streets, and all. If only they had more than %5 the USA's per-capita attorneys things might've stayed peaceful and prosperous for longer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
john o'haire, 29 Jan 2010 @ 7:24pm

attorneys
Did you hear about the lawyer who took VIAGRA?

He got TALLER......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]