Being Pissed Off Doesn't Mean You Have A Legal Claim

from the repeat-this-over-and-over-again dept

Mon, Jun 25th 2012 1:17pm — Mike Masnick

One of the common themes we see over and over again is people filing lawsuits just because they're upset about something (to a lesser extent, this also applies to DMCA takedowns). We just wrote about Judge Posner's shredding of Apple's patent litigation strategy, noting that just because you're "really annoyed," it doesn't mean you get to sue. Famed venture capitalist Fred Wilson has riffed on this idea, talking about how he loves investing in innovators rather than copycats, and he feels a visceral emotional anger when he sees an innovator copied, but that's no reason for a lawsuit:

I have often felt that "palpable sense of injustice" when our firm is an investor in the innovator and a copycat competitor shows up. But there is a difference between being pissed and having a legal claim.

Indeed, as we've written before, we recognize the emotional response that comes about when this happens. It's natural to get angry when someone copies you. But is it a reason to go legal? That's much more difficult to justify. In fact, as Wilson notes, often someone copying you can be a good thing:

Knockoffs create competition for the innovator and keep them honest. And they provide an opportunity for those that cannot, for some reason, work with the innovator.

And, as he notes, if the original company is a true innovator, they'll keep innovating and stay ahead of the competition anyway:

If the innovator keeps innovating, as Apple and [YCombinator] have, they will do fine and will enjoy the spoils that come from creating the category and leading it.

And that's really the key in all of this. Competition is not a static snapshot. Time doesn't stand still. Innovation is an ongoing process. Copycats are often a bit behind the leader, but as long as the leader truly understands its market, it's in a much better position to continue innovating and leading. The copycats act as incentive to increase that innovation, and that seems like a pretty good thing, if we believe that greater innovation is a good thing. People have a natural reaction where they think that "copying" is bad -- but if you look at the overall impact, and the fact that it results in greater innovation from the leader as well, it turns out the opposite is true.

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: copying, dmca, fred wilson, richard posner
Companies: apple

21 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:27pm

Sometimes the "rip-offs" are better than the one that spawned them.

I'd hate to be stuck with only one option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:31pm
  
  Re:
  I'd hate to be stuck with only one option.
  
  Only one option = NO option. I think you meant "with no options".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:32pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Is that how it's said? Then no options it is.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - A Dan (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:54pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      AC was wrong in correcting you. Only one option = No choice of options, not no option. Abstaining is still an option.
      
      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson's_choice
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:31pm

But Apple, and other tech companies, are innovating new ways to sue one another. Isn't this a good thing? =P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:31pm

what a shame that the courts dont realise the same thing about the entertainment industries and their attitude towards file sharing. if they could be educated as to the benefits and took notice of them instead of expecting the world to stop sharing just because they get the ache over it, what a more pleasant place we would all be living in. it would make a nice change for those industries to listen to others instead of keep forcing their outdated attitude all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sehlat (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:39pm

But ... but ... innovation is evil!
It means David Lowery doesn't get his pony!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2012 @ 2:45pm
  
  Re: But ... but ... innovation is evil!
  He could get an eDonkey though.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 3:13pm
    
    Re: Re: But ... but ... innovation is evil!
    He doesn't need it. He's already shown himself to be an ass.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
xebikr (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 1:54pm

Apple innovation...
If the innovator keeps innovating, as Apple and [YCombinator] have, they will do fine

Which explains the lawsuits. I haven't seen a whole lot of innovation from Apple the last couple years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- New Mexico Mark, 25 Jun 2012 @ 2:13pm
  
  Re: Apple innovation...
  I guess that would explain Apple patenting a shape. Hmmmmm... I think I'll patent... oblong!
  
  http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/06/apple-patents-the-macbook-airs-wedge-design-bad-ne ws-for-ultrabook-makers/
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jordan (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 2:20pm

palpable sense of injustice

Am I the only one that read that as a "Palpatine sense of injustice"?

Now that's injustice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prashanth (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 4:58pm

I'm angry
[sarcasm]
I'm angry at TechDirt for pointing this inconvenient fact out, so I'm going to slap TechDirt with a DMCA takedown!
[/sarcasm]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Jun 2012 @ 1:50am
  
  Re: I'm angry
  I'm angry at you for being angry, Imma sue you for $234,764,633,636,252,636,262
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
anon, 25 Jun 2012 @ 4:59pm

really
Until patent law is completely overhauled it will cause problems for any manufacturer and prevent innovation. But there are those in the market that survive from doing nothing but claiming patents have been infringed. Only those that use a patent should be allowed a limited use of that patent to generate funds. Patents should not be transferable and should only be valid for 2-3 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sorrykb (profile), 25 Jun 2012 @ 6:54pm

I've been damaged
I'm pissed off that someone dares to say that being pissed off doesn't give me cause to sue. My lawyer will contact you soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wilkinsy (profile), 26 Jun 2012 @ 3:36am

as Eddie implied I'm blown away that a person able to profit $7977 in four weeks on the internet. did you look at this site http://thinfi.com/7py
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Jun 2012 @ 4:34am
  
  Re:
  If I wasn't text browsing I'd so flag you.
  
  Then I'd sue
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh (profile), 26 Jun 2012 @ 10:07am

Copycats
When Edison first started inventing, he was quickly seen as someone who "had it right", and copycats came out of the walls. He was not very wealthy, and depended on funding from his inventions to proceed onward.
But in Mr. Wilson's opinion, Edison should have spent his scarce funds to invent, had the result taken by a better funded copycat, used more of his scarce funds to invent, had his invention taken ... so when his scarce funds ran out (all output, little or no input), what would he do? AND, would we be better off in a world with no electric lights?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2012 @ 8:41pm
  
  Re: Copycats
  Edison was a litigious asshole, anything trying to paint him as a victim is rather darned false.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kwas (profile), 27 Jun 2012 @ 12:58am

foteliki samochodowe
hie hie hie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]