Looking Back On Another Year Of Patent Insanity
from the by-the-numbers dept
The Patent Troll Tracker is doing what he does best (well, other than pissing off patent hoarders and their lawyers): tracking patent litigation. As we approach the end of the year, he's got a nice rundown on some numbers concerning patent litigation. For those who think that pointless and wasteful patent litigation is on the decline, think again. Even in just the last three months, the pace has been accelerating -- perhaps as patent hoarders rush to get cases in before any patent reform makes progress in Congress -- or before the Supreme Court (thankfully) quashes another abuse of the patent system. The Troll Tracker looks at the Fortune 100 to see who got sued the most for patent infringement, and found that the top 35 companies were sued a combined 500 times for patent infringement in the last two years alone. That's an awful lot of money wasted on lawyers that could be going towards actual innovation. Of the lawsuits over the past two years, approximately 50% came from companies who didn't actually make any products themselves. However, in the last 3 months, that number shoots up to 70% from companies that don't make products. And if you limit the list to tech companies, 80% of the lawsuits came from companies that don't make products. Shouldn't this be ringing some alarm bells?
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 litigation, patent tracker, patent trolls, patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No products?
That would take care of some of the patent hoarders.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No products?
They really need to treat patents on an industry basis, for review at least. Get a panel of knowledgeable experts on the industry, and while a panel member they can not work in the industry. I really love it when some USPTO employees approve patents and don't know what 'ethernet' is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No products?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No products?
Exactly dude
those fucking patent hoarders like US universities doing advanced research and getting patents
To hell with those bastards
No need for your stinking R&D
We want everything for free
Freedoom for morons !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reform?
Oh - they are happy to pass legislation that increases their own earnings, of course. See the immigraiton debacle for an example.
This is NOT a democratic bash - it alas seems to apply to ANY political group once they taste the power of legislation.
Patent reform - like tax reform - will be very hard to achieve in any REAL sense - though I'm sure they will pass SOMETHING and then do a lot of bragging.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reform?
I dont know ... it seems that a growing number of large corps are becoming more irritated by the whole mess everyday. I have no idea, but I imagine they are upset with the increasing budget of their legal dept. When big campaign contributors talk, congress listens. Oh, and don't discount the influence of the Supreme court.
So, I still have hopes ... w'ell see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Reform?
Please go fuck yourself
Those people in Congress who listen too much to money donors should be kicked out of Washington DC
I wouldn't be suprised at all if we see some big ugly Wash DC lobbist scandal ala Abramoff, this time about so-called "patent reform"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't think reform is going to completely solve the problem either.
Rather, it is better to abolish patent altogether.
Because evidences for positive benefit is scarce.
The software industry, for example actually thrive without patent. When software patent entered, all it does it drive the cost of doing business up. The agriculture industry's economic productivity has skyrocketed without patent. The pharmaceutical industry is harmed rather than benefit from patents(See the Italian pharmaceutical industry for example).
If you think patent can be good for society, tell me some evidences to back it up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because evidences for positive benefit is scarce."
You re right dude
Now stop typing nonsense on you comp, stop eating drinking take your close off and go live in the woods like your retarded ancestors
You get what you pay for dude
Wanna have the fruits of civilazation in this dog-eat-dog capitalistic society - must have patent system in place
No other alternative
Well, yes, there is one - communism
Ever lived in any communist country dude ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is called a GNU/Linux operating system.
And by the way, IBM, RedHat, Canonical Ltd, and others contributed code to it.
And why my comment is nonsense? You got evidence for showing why patent is good?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That's GGGGGGGGGNUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU/linux
As far as I remember Kernigan and Ritchie worked for a charity
And BTW you still need a comp to run the shit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
One example of competition is the fork of GCC called EGCS. EGCS was more vigorous in development than GCC. EGCS eventually replaced GCC in many linux distribution. However GCC team admit defeat and merge with EGCS, and then reformed to ensured that such stagnation won't happen and thus prevent another fork.
Today, the Free Software Foundation's GCC rival some of the best proprietary competition in existence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
are you fucking serious ?
You wrote the whole paragrah about GCC and the likes and DO NOT know who Kernighan and Ritchie are ???????????????
Well, my advice to you:
before making a complete idiot out of yourself go to any large technical bookstore and buy the now classical book
"C programing language" written by Kernighan and Ritchie many many years ago
Read it first, dude, before you even try to compile your shitty C code with GCC
OK I'll make it simple for you:
http://www.amazon.com/Programming-Language-Prentice-Hall-Software/dp/0131103628/ref=pd_bbs_2 ?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198895621&sr=1-2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I know about this book, but I did not remember the authors. Still hoping to buy it though.
You know what?
Why don't YOU demonstrate your economic knowledge by demonstrating evidences that show patent is a good thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
forget about economic knowledge
This is as simple as 2x2=4
Would you spend 5 years of your life working on some invention (unpaid late nights, working vacations etc.) if any company out there can just copy all your ideas once you relese them.
About Kernigahn and Ritchie
It is really ironic that you know GNU and Linux and don't know the original creators of C and Unix
IPod generation...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I am not afraid of copycats or my competitors.
In fact I even built a wiki that anybody can copy to their delight and in the process, made some money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In other words you want to contribute to Bill's fortune out of your measly monthly allowance ?
heck, do it then
Just don't project your behaivior on everybody else, especially people with real responsibilities, like mortgages and bills to pay, families to feed etc.
I'd like to know what you'll be saying 10-15 years from now...
"If you're Not a Socialist When You're 20 You Have No Heart
If you're not a capitalist when you're 40, you have no brains"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I see it with my own eyes that releasing stuff to the public domain does no harm to the author whatsoever. In fact, that is how this particular author made his living.
I know RedHat thrives even though anybody can copy them.
This is reality.
I got examples.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He-He-He
You should really look at some fine print in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux corporate licensing agreement...
I did... looks like a scam to me, considering the fact that RH Linux is largely based on free slave labor of countless developers around the world
Heck, I'm not one of those guys, as you can probably guess
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Labour theory of value
Sounds like you are a believer in the labour theory of value which is sort of amusing given your other professed beliefs.
The issue is not how hard the inventor worked but whether he has created anything of special value by inventing something materially earlier than it would have been invented otherwise.
The real complaint that people like me have is that patents are being claimed on trivialities and on natural and inevitable developments and the concern is that the patent system on balance is slowing down development in some fields . As to whether or not your invention falls in that category I don't have an opinion since as far as I know you have never told us what it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Labour theory of value
In Mike's authoritative opinion telephone was an obvious invention and Bell was nothing more than a cheating piece of shit
Keep reading techdirt, dude
The problem I have wqith dudes like you and Mike is that despite being completely unable to create anything new and useful you complain about other more creative individuals getting patent rights from the government for their inventions
Heck, people are different Joe
Some are born into rich families like Paris Hilton and just fools around all their lifes
Others have to work
Some people can invent, others can't
That's life Joe
Get used to it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Labour theory of value
I have created things that are new and useful and are in continuing use around the world albeit in a specialized field. What I did built on the work of others and was enabled by advances in hardware technology. It is precisely because:
1. I have done creative work in software;
2. I have experienced the interdependent nature of progress in software; and
3. I know from personal experience that once hardware makes a software innovation possible the innovation occurs shortly thereafter and frequently at multiple independent places;
that I am so skeptical about software patents.
Just because someone is poor and has struggled is no reason to let them lay claim to part of the intellectual commons at the expense of everyone else.
If you think that Paris Hilton "just fools around" then you have not been paying attention. Paris Hilton actually works hard and has developed a "personal brand". It is entirely possible that she is the only self made person in her family since her great grandfather.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
Now I see who you are - an absolutely clueless loser who probably spent his entire career at some dead-end engineering position with same company, doing shit like Cobol ,Fortran or the likes , maybe some old IBM mainframes
You just have no fucking clue about software as well as hardware
There is no fucking difference at all between the two
Ever heard of Turing machine ?
Hardware is 100% equivalent to software
It's the first law of computing, write it on your forehead lemonade Joe
But really there is no need to educate you any further...
Paris Hilton works hard ?
He-he-he
Yeah, she does... with her pretty face and her pussy
With job like hers who needs salary ?
She even gets paid for showing at the night clubs
And if she shows her nipple then it's a triple pay I guess
Dream job, seriously...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
But unfortunately, that doesn't work in real debates.
Now for the real test, do you have economic evidence to suggest that patent is a good thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
Dude, don't play smart ass cause you aren't
All countries eventually adopt some kind of patent system
Those without working patent system are poor nations
Heck China and India are moving towards strenthening patent protections
Russia is moving towards increasing protections for IP, that is copyrigths and patents
Do you really thinks that all those countries are run by fools ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
Very, very convincing.
Those without working patent system are poor nations
Actually, that's incorrect, and we've pointed out plenty of evidence to the contrary. If you look at the research of folks like Levine and Boldrin, Moser and Eric Schiff you'll discover that plenty of innovation occurs in the absence of a patent system, and there's little evidence that a patent system increase innovation.
Nice try angry dude. You lie about me repeatedly, you have trouble understanding basic english, and your responses when asked direct questions is to either ignore them or insult the questioner.
Is it really any wonder that no one takes you seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
The last time I checked neither a Ferrari nor a nuclear reactor were equivalent to software. You will understand that my comments on software also apply to that subset of hardware which is equivalent to software. Since they are equivalent there is no need to deal with them separately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
It's the first law of computing, write it on your forehead lemonade Joe
That is completely incorrect.
Hardware allows software.
Software has never allowed hardware.
The more powerful the hardware, the more complex the software that can be run on it.
You need to learn to understand the relationship, its fairly simple if you calm down and look at it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
don't teach me please
I have enough education already
And I've seen enough of pure hardware things in the past before I almost completely switched to the software side of things
Maybe instead of reading this shitty blog you should go to Smitsonian or elsewhere and have a look at some very early computers
Pure hardware, no software as we know it today
No source code, no compilers, no Java Virtual Machine, nothing
Don't you get it, dude, that "software" is just a convinient abstract way of describing hardware architecture and functionality ?
Do you know what Verilog is ?
How do you think semiconductor chips are designed ?
Have you heard about ASICs and FPGAs ?
The IPod generation has completely lost a sense of reality...
Sad, very sad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
Ha ha ha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of value
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Labour theory of v
Angry dude
Wishing you peace, love, brother-hood, better manners and better mental health in the New Year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Labour theory of value
Ah, angry dude once again displays he has zero reading comprehension skills. I said neither of the above things. If that's how you read my post on Bell, you need to learn some basic comprehension skills. No wonder all you can do around here is insult people.
The problem I have wqith dudes like you and Mike is that despite being completely unable to create anything new and useful
Again, I take serious offense to such lies. I have built an entire business doing something new and extremely useful.
What have you done besides complain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Wanna have the fruits of civilazation in this dog-eat-dog capitalistic society - must have patent system in place
No other alternative
Right. That's why we've pointed to plenty of examples of how a LACK of a patent system helped various countries industrialize. That's why we've pointed to plenty of evidence showing how patent systems have held back innovation, while a lack of patent system has promoted it?
Who needs evidence or facts when you're angry? Clearly, not angry dude.
Oh, then there's this laugher:
Well, yes, there is one - communism
I've asked this before, but never received an answer. How is a system where a centralized gov't grants monopolies and subsidies to individuals considered "more capitalist" than simply allowing the free market to work?
Somehow, given angry dude's standard comments on this site, I doubt he'll be able to explain it.
But, if he does, I'll once again ask the standard questions:
Angry dude, why did you lie about having a patent a few years ago?
You recently admitted that you just received a patent. Would you care to prove that to us by pointing to it? Given your earlier lie claiming you had a patent, you have little credibility without providing any proof.
Finally, you have already admitted in the past that you have lied about me and what I do at Techdirt, claiming falsely that we are a PR shop and that we get paid for advocacy -- which we do not. You have also claimed, falsely, that my position on patents is the result of business that Techdirt does, when I have pointed out that not a single company we work with agrees with my position on patents. You once admitted that you knew you were lying and apologized, but then earlier today you posted the same lie again.
I'm not sure how many times we need to repeat this, but I'm completely open to a discussion on the actual merits and problems of the patent system. You have yet to engage. Instead, you come here and insult me and others and proceed to lie about me.
It's hard for anyone to take you seriously when you repeat such things. I'd ask that if you cannot contribute with any substance that you simply go away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Jeep Example
Not only did they come up with a design that had true 4 wheel drive but could carry 1000lbs. They blew the competition away. Ford, GM and a few other big names lost out in the competition.
The only downside was Willey's was too small a manufacturer to get the contract. They could not produce enough jeeps to make a dent in the war effort. The big names had the tools, capital, work force and space to pull it off.
So the Army took the design gave it everyone that could produce them. Willey's got to make trailors to be towed by their own design(I say they got lucky to even get that)
Even if Willey's was granted sole manufacturing rights they would have lost out in the space because they could not make enough to keep intrest in their design. The competition could make more of their inferior products. And if the big boys were to stumble upon some of Willey's feature they would have gotten sued and the innovation would have been lost because of the litigation.
So if it weren't for the sharing of information, we would not have been able to produce enough of those feisty little buggers to move all of our equipment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easy method of reform
This allows universities and think tanks to receive patents even though they will not likely ever produce it, and they would be required to at least try to sell it to a company that would produce it, which would be what is best for society as a whole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Easy method of reform
Idiot
Have you ever tried to sell your patent to some large company ?
Try it once or just shut up dude
Really, why don't you all just shut up, techdirt morons ?
You have absolutely no fucking idea about how capitalism works
It's an ugly ugly picture, dude
a dog-eat-dog society by corporate design
Capitalism sucks, dude
Just keep your rosy glasses on all the time...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]