The Competition Is On: How Many Companies Can You Sue In A Single Patent Infringement Lawsuit?
from the taking-bets dept
Earlier this month, we noted the growing trend of patent holders to sue a ton of companies at once, rather than suing a few at a time. There are probably two major reasons for this. First, is that companies that sense they're about to get sued for infringement have been a lot more aggressive in filing for declaratory judgments saying they don't infringe. This matters because then the lawsuit is more likely to take place in a court that the company is comfortable with, rather than where the patent holder wants to file (which is Marshall, Texas). The second, and probably much bigger, reason is that patent holders are scared of both the pending patent reform bill in Congress and all the efforts by the Supreme Court to reel in many of the egregious abuses of the patent system. And, of course, since the latest case on that subject that the Supreme Court is checking out involves whether or not patent holders can shake down companies up and down the supply chain (meaning that it gets licenses for the same item many times over), it's no surprise to see many patent holders filing massive lawsuits of just that nature quickly.The anonymous Troll Tracker lawyer notes that this past Tuesday alone 126 companies were sued for patent infringement, 113 of those in Marshall. However, as he notes, much of that is due to one patent holder, who sued a massive 91 or 92 companies (Troll Tracker says 91, the Inquirer says 92 and has the list if you want to count). And, of course, the patent holder in question is suing up and down the supply chain to get all of those companies included. As the Troll Tracker notes: "He sued the allegedly infringing manufacturer. And he sued every single one of the manufacturer's customers. And he sued every single one of the manufacturer's customers' retailers." Expect to see more cases along these lines in the coming months, so perhaps we should start keeping a tally to see who wins for the largest single number of companies sued for infringement in a single lawsuit.
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: patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Is that his real name ?
Dear Harthcock (smirk)
Bring it on. Ok, I can't stand it HaHAHAHAHA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Retroactive Patent Reform
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Retroactive Patent Reform
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hunh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hunh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shut up, techdirt retards !!!
The company website is http://www.siliconlaude.com
Precisely the reason why patents are needed in this society
As for the merits of this particular case, the judge and the jury will have access to all of the facts to make a proper decision.
For future times, do a little research before buying into Mike's anti-patent and anti-copyright propaganda...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One of many
This is funny:
"Those skilled in the art, however, will recognize that many modifications and variations besides those specifically mentioned may be made in the techniques described herein without departing substantially from the concept of the present invention. Accordingly, it should be clearly understood that the form of the invention as described herein is exemplary only and is not intended as a limitation on the scope of the invention. "
Having to defend against this sort of legal scam is a waste. The time, money and expertise wasted would be better spent on productive rather than destructive activities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One of many
Didn't they teach you not to judge patents based on their titles and abstracts ?
Go to the claims, punk
As for the quoted section, this is a standard boilerplate inserted by lawyers into each and every patent application.
Go fuck yourself, you, brainless waste of organic material
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One of many
Hmmmmm....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One of many
Good to see ya again man! I was waiting for your valuable contribution to the discussion at hand. You are such a positive influence upon this forum. I do not know how everyone would survive without your in depth analysis of the topic at hand.
Again, thank you so much AD!
btw, I still think their claim is hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The answer to the ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not at the party
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Name hit list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Competition Is On: How Many Companies Can You
Great strategy if your a Troll. Basically a legal mugging.
Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Competition Is On: How Many Companies Can
You should know that this particular lawsuit was filed pro se
It looks more like a public statement by the abused inventor than carefully ploted legal strategy
In the latter case contigency lawyers would be certainly involved
You just don't have a slightest idea about what it means to go pro se
Just read about Bob Kearns: the guy went pro se against automotive industry
If you are a reasonable person never ever sue a bunch of multinationals pro se - better hire good contingency lawyers to beet the crap out of defendants before they bury you in their motions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Competition Is On: How Many Companies
It looks more like a public statement by the abused inventor than carefully ploted legal strategy"
Actually, it looks like he's betting that at least some of the companies he's suing are simply going to settle instead of going to court, thus saving himself the lawyer's fee.
Harthcock stated that the MIPS EJTAG violated literally almost "every element of Claim 1 and Claim 2 of the '368 Patent."
After looking at Claim 1 and Claim 2 of his patent, I have to agree. Of course, the reason he's correct is because his claims cover extremely generic processes.
Summary of claims 1 & 2 - A programmable microcomputing device that can transfer data to an external device while simultaneously running a program through a standardized interface.
I can understand bringing a case against MIPS if he legitimately feels that his patent has been infringed, but suing all the licensees of MIPS shows that he's hoping for settlements rather than depend on the strength of his patent.
"If you are a reasonable person never ever sue a bunch of multinationals pro se - better hire good contingency lawyers to beet the crap out of defendants before they bury you in their motions"
That would apparently be true of just about every federal court other than the one in Marshall Texas, home of the Rocket Docket. When the judge pats himself on the back for denying motions and rushing cases through the system, you create a haven for patent trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can I sue two companies at once
[ link to this | view in chronology ]