Hack Attack In South Korea Gets Access To Data On Over 70% Of Everyone In The Country

Intellectual Ventures' Response To This American Life: Oh Those Crazy Reporters Don't Understand Disruption

from the that's-it? dept

Fri, Jul 29th 2011 4:28pm — Mike Masnick

Wow. I just came across Intellectual Ventures' almost entirely content-less "perspective" concerning the recent This American Life episode that compared Intellectual Ventures to an organized crime shakedown outfit, noting that the company appeared to be stockpiling questionable patents, which were then being used to sue companies that were actually innovating. Intellectual Ventures' execs were interviewed a few times for the story, including the hilarious clip (which I mentioned in our original post) in which one of its co-founders claimed he couldn't understand the USPTO's own website, and a PR person tried to shut down the interview. So, they had to expect what was coming. And you would think that they would have a response.

But they don't.

The entirety of the blog post can be summed up in IV basically saying "we're just too damn disruptive for those silly NPR reporters to understand us." But they don't refute or respond to a single allegation from the report. Instead, they just use the word "disrupt" (or disruptive/disruption/disrupting) five times in a short blog post. If they truly believe that it's just that their business is "disruptive," then they could perhaps explain why IV patents of extremely questionable quality are being used to pressure tons of companies into paying large sums of money. But... that goes ignored.

There's also this:

The recent story on �This American Life� dramatically portrays the point of view that patents have a negative impact on innovation. We at Intellectual Ventures fundamentally disagree with that notion, which flies in the face of centuries of evidence.

This is false. Dozens of studies on the history of the patent system have shown that patents have a negative impact on innovation. It's kind of funny that IV would claim otherwise. We've highlighted many of those studies in the past, and Bessen and Meurer have a whole book that discusses many of those studies. It seems that, once again, IV thinks that as long as it sticks to the party line it can get away with its shameful business practices.

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: disruption, innovation, patent trolls, patents
Companies: intellectual ventures

41 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Richard (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 4:39pm

Disruption
Not all disruption is good - mostly it is bad.

IV is very disruptive - but not in a good way!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Jul 2011 @ 6:57pm
  
  Re: Disruption
  Agreed.They are disrupting the manufacturing sector of the US economy and making it flee the US jurisdiction and go to China. That is great for China. You can be sure that the Chinese government knows what is going on, and is in no hurry whatsoever for those silly Americans to come to their senses. Meanwhile, back in the USA, you get to suffer persistently high unemployment, an out-of-control budget deficit and a nearly dysfunctional political system. The American electorate is seething with anger. The Tea Party branch of the Republican Party is doing a fine job of reflecting the anger, so they do well electorally. However the Tea Party has no idea how to, nor any intention of, getting the USA out of the trouble it is in. Americans, things are not going to be so nice for you. Yep, that could be described as "disruptive".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:55pm
  
  Re: Disruption
  Lovely misuse of the term �disruption�. It�s supposed to mean �knocking established players out of their complacency�, not �stifling new players with new ideas�.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ken (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 4:50pm

Our Current Patant and Copyright Systems are un-American
There is nothing American about our current patent system. It destroys the pioneering spirit of ingenuity. Long patent terms stifle competition and give very little incentive to actually implement the invention.

Our current patent system is a form of government protectionism and does not conform with our ideals of self-reliance, free markets, competition, and the limited role of government. Inventors do not need government protection to be successful. Inventors and entrepreneurs do not need to be a protected class. The thought of someone needing government protection as opposed to competing in a free market should offend the sensibilities of all free thinking Americans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 9:39pm
  
  Re: Our Current Patant and Copyright Systems are un-American
  I agree.
  
  The one American idea that patents appeal to is this: Greed. Greed is at the heart of the "American dream" of starting with nothing and getting rich through those ideas you stated - and greed itself is not always bad, much good can come of it if properly managed and checked.
  
  Greed is the reason that even the hundreds of companies that are being actively harmed by patents still continue to support and defend the broken system. The irrational belief that if their company suddenly comes up with some new idea, that they can lock it up, prevent anyone else from using it, and make oodles of money.
  
  Incidentally, it is this same irrational belief that causes many of the poorest people in the country to support tax cuts for the rich, because one day they want to be one of those rich, even if it will certainly cost them more in their own taxes or cuts to services.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Atkray (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 10:56pm
    
    Re: Re: Our Current Patant and Copyright Systems are un-American
    It is also the reason there is a city in the middle of the Nevada desert and why welfare recipients will part with their cigarette money to buy lottery tickets.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Richard (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 3:47am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Our Current Patant and Copyright Systems are un-American
      It is also the reason there is a city in the middle of the Nevada desert
      
      Nah - that is there because of the atomic bomb.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jul 2011 @ 6:36pm

Could be worse, they could be trying to attack NPR on grounds of copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Jul 2011 @ 7:46pm
  
  Re:
  'We don't like what you said and you called us by name' style Trademark suit incoming?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kevin (PaxSkeptica) (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 7:30pm

"...flies in the face of centuries of evidence."
It's unfortunate that they can expect most readers to be so uncritical that they would accept a statement like that at face value, without any citation or additional proof.

It's becoming something of a fallacy in its own right, this trope. Perhaps we should name it. The Argument from I Left My Evidence in My Other Coat's Pocket?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jul 2011 @ 8:17pm

You said: "Dozens of studies on the history of the patent system have shown that patents have a negative impact on innovation"

Me: I always get a laugh out of this sort of comment. It's somewhere between somewhat dishonest and and collection of outright lies.

Patents may limit "innovation by paint color" for a period of time, but none of the studies tends to consider if we got the idea together faster because of patents. Did the patent system provide the needed business environment to encourage research? Did the idea come along earlier because of it?

If you look in very, very, very short term, yes, patents can stop the type of innovation that you are so fond of (added an MP3 player to that kitchen gadget and painted it blue!), but over the long run, we get bigger and better ideas faster with patents, and we also get parallel, non-competitive true innovation as other companies and individuals attempt to find other ways to accomplish the goal.

Figures don't lie, but liars can figure. Those "reports" and "studies" all come from that sort of playing field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:10pm
  
  Re:
  It's kind of funny how you resort to lying in your desperate rants about lying.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws.org (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:47pm
  
  Re:
  Did the patent system provide the needed business environment to encourage research? Did the idea come along earlier because of it?
  
  A resounding NO on both accounts. People invent stuff/innovate because they need solutions to a problem. Easy as that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2011 @ 6:02am
    
    Re: Re:
    That's wrong. That's the same as saying the only time someone would invent something would be if they personally had a problem and had to invent a solution.
    
    If I can't make money inventing something that provides a solution for someone else...
    
    What exactly is my motivation to innovate?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btrussell (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 6:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      To help your neighbor?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2011 @ 7:28am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That's certainly a utopian notion, but it isn't really the way people seem to go about their lives.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2011 @ 7:38am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Maybe you should move.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2011 @ 7:48am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        To?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2011 @ 7:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Paradise City.
        
        Where the grass is green and the girls are pretty.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - WysiWyg (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 8:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      But patents, at least the way things are now, are hindering people from making profits from their inventions.
      
      Just look at the so called "patent-thicket" around smartphones; is anyone really depending on that to invent newer and better phones? Or does it mean that if you're not "big enough", then you will not be able to survive the "patent war"?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Richard (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 1:29pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      That's wrong. That's the same as saying the only time someone would invent something would be if they personally had a problem and had to invent a solution.
      
      It doesn't have to be a personal problem - a shared problem will do. Or a problem where the fascination of solving it provides a motivation. In your universe no one would ever do crosswords, play chess or read detective novels.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Fenderson (profile), 1 Aug 2011 @ 10:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If I can't make money inventing something that provides a solution for someone else...
      
      What exactly is my motivation to innovate?
      
      There's a ton of other motivations to innovate, but for the sake of argument, let's pretend that making money is always the prime driver.
      
      ...patents are not required to make money from inventing things. Bad patents (which are common, and include all software patents) make it less likely that you'll make money by inventing things because you're very likely to run afoul of a submarine patent somewhere and get destroyed in a lawsuit.
      
      I don't think patents as a conept are bad, by the way. I think they can be very good and can attain their stated purpose. I do think that how they are implemented in the US, however, is terrible and worse than no patent system at all.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:47pm
  
  Re:
  Bollocks. If you were talking any more shit, you'd be that German guy who gave an elephant an olive oil enema.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:56pm
  
  Re: none of the studies tends to consider if we got the idea together faster because of patents.
  Yes they do, and the answer is no.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:56pm
  
  Re: Did the patent system provide the needed business environment to encourage research?
  No, it discouraged it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 29 Jul 2011 @ 11:57pm
  
  Re: Did the idea come along earlier because of it?
  It�s not about the idea, it�s about the implementation of the idea. And the answer is no.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 2:22am
  
  Re:
  Courtrooms aren't really hotbeds of innovation. And unless you consider various types of letterhead "innovative," NPE's aren't innovating shit.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 3:53am
  
  Re:
  You said: "Dozens of studies on the history of the patent system have shown that patents have a negative impact on innovation"
  
  Me: I always get a laugh out of this sort of comment. It's somewhere between somewhat dishonest and and collection of outright lies.
  
  You've never studied any engineering history have you? You need to be completely ignorant to say that.
  
  Ask yourself why the US (where the aeroplane was - supposedly - invented) entered WW1 with no serviceable aircraft and had to buy them from europe. That piece of history, on its own, completely destroys your argument.
  
  It also shows why patents are ultimately bad news even for those that hold them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - dwg, 2 Aug 2011 @ 2:32pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Although this did lead to something good: patent pledges. Actually, let me qualify that--the patent pledge that this led to was a good one: the government forced the patent holders to agree not to sue each other so the US could build freakin' airplanes for war. Now that's eminent domain I can get behind.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 3:54am
  
  Re:
  Me: I always get a laugh out of this sort of comment. It's somewhere between somewhat dishonest and and collection of outright lies.
  
  Because I've never even read any on those studies - after all they can't possibly be right because they contradict my assumptions.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Devil's Coachman (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 4:48am
  
  Re:
  I couldn't help but notice that you did not cite a single, actual "study" or "report", probably because you cannot, and there are none. Nonetheless, you continue to spew meaningless drivel as if it were scientific fact, and expect others to take your word for it. FAIL!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 29 Jul 2011 @ 8:19pm

Good old Intellectual Vultures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 30 Jul 2011 @ 8:14am

Intellectual Ventures

Nothing intellectual about it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh (profile), 30 Jul 2011 @ 9:00am

IV and patenting
Good article. It would have been a great article if it had not been so biased.
ALL defensive patents (the only type IV has) are bad; we all know that. I suspect IV knows it, but likes the money.
ALL patents (indirectly quoting both sides in the argument) are:
1. NOT defensive, and
2. NOT bad or "disruptive".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nicedoggy, 30 Jul 2011 @ 1:47pm

Quote:
W�rgl was the site of the "Miracle of W�rgl" during the Great Depression. It was started on the 31st of July 1932 with the issuing of "Certified Compensation Bills", a form of currency commonly known as Stamp Scrip, or Freigeld. This was an application of the monetary theories of the economist Silvio Gesell by the town's then mayor, Michael Unterguggenberger.

The experiment resulted in a growth in employment and meant that local government projects such as new houses, a reservoir , a ski jump and a bridge could all be completed, seeming to defy the depression in the rest of the country. Inflation and deflation are also reputed to have been non-existent for the duration of the experiment.

Despite attracting great interest at the time, including from French Premier Edouard Daladier and the economist Irving Fisher, the "experiment" was terminated by the Austrian National Bank on the 1st September 1933 on the basis of the "Certified Compensation Bills" being a threat to the Bank's monopoly on printing money.

In 2006 milestones were placed, beginning from the railroad station through the downtown, to show this history, on top of questioning the authenticity of never-ending exponential growth triggered by the compound interest.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worgl

Other Sources:
http://alt-money.tribe.net/thread/70e5eb29-853d-44ca-9faa-b789d1757037

All this money hoarding by corporations can only result in one thing and that is bankruptcy, but this hoarding is now on a global scale which could bring serious problems when everybody is broke and no one can produce anything without being extorted by a small group of people who don't produce anything of real value.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vic Kley, 30 Jul 2011 @ 10:23pm

IV is an Insurance Company - Patents are Key to Progress and Innovation
As usual masnick conflates the unconflateable. I don't know if IV is any of the things masnick and NPR seem to accuse them of being. In my expeerience they sell insurance against being sued and power to sue based on a large body of inventions in a given area to large corporations. This and IV have nothing to do with the value and importance of patents.

What I do know is this in my life so far, I have used key and basic inventions (patents) to deliver new and important things including capabilities that DID NOT EXIST IN THE WORLD before I created them. In the process has been created some wealth and many good paying jobs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 31 Jul 2011 @ 1:24am
  
  Re:I don't know if IV is any of the things masnick and NPR seem to accuse them of being.
  That�s why you should read and understand the arguments before trying to respond to them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- indieThing (profile), 1 Aug 2011 @ 4:47am
  
  Re: IV is an Insurance Company - Patents are Key to Progress and Innovation
  You may very well have done, but I've also introduced a few 'new things' to the world as well, and you know what, I did it totally without any patents :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- dwg, 2 Aug 2011 @ 2:36pm
  
  Re: IV is an Insurance Company - Patents are Key to Progress and Innovation
  For example, you created an "e" in "conflatable" where none exists. I can see where wealth and jobs would follow.
  
  Dude, your spin has made me dizzy. "Insurance against being sued?" Who creates the largest threat of such potential suits? Oh yeah, trolls like IV. Any normal human can tell when a patent doesn't read on a new invention--only giant trolls have the resources to sue regardless.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
staff, 1 Aug 2011 @ 8:07am

rest
"questionable patents"

To you, all patents are questionable. That includes Edison's light bulb and the Wright Brothers airplane. Give it and us a rest.

For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- greg.fenton (profile), 3 Aug 2011 @ 9:44pm
  
  Re: rest
  Thanks for the link!
  
  Internal Server Error
  
  The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
  
  Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@truereform.piausa.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
  
  More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
  
  Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
  
  Apache/2.2.19 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.19 OpenSSL/0.9.8e-fips-rhel5 mod_bwlimited/1.4 mod_fcgid/2.3.6 Phusion_Passenger/3.0.7 Server at truereform.piausa.org Port 80
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]