Expensive Patent Attorneys Know How To Cut & Paste, But Not Search & Replace
from the get-your-money's-worth dept
Well, it's a mistake plenty of folks are bound to make eventually, but that doesn't make it any less amusing. Joe Mullin has a short post about a big time patent law firm that has launched two recent patent lawsuits over the same basic patents held by a patent holding firm. The only problem? In filing the second lawsuit, it appears that the patent attorneys used cut & paste from the first lawsuit, but didn't use search & replace to get rid of the name of the original defendant. Hopefully, the patent holder didn't pay too much for the cost of filing that second 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: cut and paste, lawsuits, lawyers, patents, search and replace
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
let me help
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
horseshit again
Do you think I would pay this kind of money out of my own pocket if he wasn't worth it ?
Patent attorneys are different just like dentists
YOu'd better pick a good one
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent attorneys
(Important disclosure: I have attorneys as clients. LOL)
Robert
http://www.thebestdwidefense.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Patent attorneys
This is doubly true if you're charging $300 an hour for your work.
(Oh, how is it plagarism to cut and paste your own work? Because most of what I do is work for hire, which means the client buys the copyright. Cutting and pasting into document for another client violates the first client's copyright.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Which would make them...patent lawyers would it not?
Perhaps neither well qualified or skilled but if that's on their shingle now that's what they are.
ttfn
John
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent lawyers generally prepare and file patent applications with the USPTO on the behalf of inventors. Indeed for many patent lawyers, this service is the only legal service that they provide. However, once a patent application issues as a patent any lawyer may file a patent lawsuit to enforce a patent against an infringer.
Many personal injury lawyers have recently tried to jump into contingency patent litigation as a new source of revenue. They usually find themselves over their heads quickly if they do not bring in a patent lawyer early to help them out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Patent attorneys
Also, legal documents are not covered by work for hire. An attorney is a contractor, not an employee and legal documents aren't in the short, narrow list of things covered by work-for-hire for contractors.
Besides, at $300 an hour, do you really want to pay an attorney to spend 4 hours or 1 hour to get the same work product?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simple Mistake
attorneys
[ link to this | view in thread ]