If You Read Just One Article About The Patent Mess, Make It This One
from the infuriating dept
Steven Levy has always been a great writer covering the tech industry, but his article on "the patent problem" for Wired is a must read, even if you're familiar with these stories. He does a great job illustrating just how screwed up the patent system is, focusing on a few key trolls, and pulling in some important information and data to support the anecdotal claims. Much of the story is about Mitchell Medina, who took a ridiculous patent that came from an idea about scanning medical documents into electronic format, and turned it into a belief that he held a patent on which practically every website infringed. You really should read the whole thing, but a few tidbits: first off, Medina and the two other people named on the patent never actually could build a working product.Although the three had never tried to build a working model before they were granted the patent, they now set out to create a business based on the idea. Elias made a prototype, albeit one that Medina would later admit “didn’t work particularly well.” He claimed to have visited “every big player” they could think of in the computer industry to see if they would like to license his patent and build a commercial version themselves. He also claimed that he had attempted to raise venture capital to create a company of his own. But no corporation or VC would put money into it. According to Medina, they were particularly annoyed when, during a meeting, an executive from IBM’s Lotus division rudely dismissed the idea of paying to use the concept. “He acted as if these kinds of patents were somehow laughable,” Lech says.Eventually Medina cut out the guy who actually came up with the idea of scanning documents, and set himself up as a patent troll. He sued over 100 companies -- and realized that as long as the "license" he asked for was cheaper than fighting him in court, everyone would pay up, and everyone did... except one company, Flagstar Bancorp. Levy goes through details of the seven years spent fighting the case, including two separate district court judges who absolutely slammed the lawsuit (one said the case had "indicia of extortion") and told Medina he had to pay up for filing such a ridiculous lawsuit (in between all that, the appeals court, ridiculously, disagreed and sent it back). Eventually the appeals court agreed with the lower court, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, but it was a massive waste of time and energy. Amazingly, the guy who demanded payment from all those companies (and got it from most), for doing absolutely nothing to actually help with the development of e-commerce, claims he's a "victim."
Mitchell Medina, who has sued more than 100 companies for infringing his patents, sees himself as a victim. “When Jobs and Wozniak or Hewlett and Packard start in a garage, they’re heroes and captains of industry,” he says. “If you apply for a patent first, you’re a troll.” Via email from Africa, he continues to attack the Flagstar decision, claiming that Martinez ignored key evidence and ruled incorrectly. (Medina felt it best not to talk by phone, because, as he put it, “I tend to speak my mind, and it would be unwise for me to do so without the self-censorship of writing.”)Really, this is just touching the surface. Even if you're familiar with the Flagstar case (which we wrote about last year when the final CAFC ruling came down), reading Levy's detailed piece is worth it. The problem, of course, is that this kind of thing is happening over and over and over again -- nearly all of it taking money from productive purposes of building companies and products, and sending it to lawyers. It's a massive drain on the economy and it's about time we fixed it.
“We did nothing improper,” he writes. “The judges in this case comported themselves like spectators in a Roman coliseum who wanted to see plenty of blood on the floor in the form of litigant’s money before they considered the show worthy of their interest.”
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: e-commerce, mitchell medina, patent trolls, patents, scanning
Companies: eon-net, flagstar
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's hard to trust an author's take on a matter (especially a controversial matter) when their explanation contradicts their direct quotes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If the trolling company can't actually build a working model based upon their patent, and yet are suing other companies who are using a device that actually works, then it's pretty obvious that their patent does not in fact cover what they are suing for, because if the other companies were in fact infringing on their patent, their devices wouldn't work either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If they had tried (and were determined) they would have succeeded. AC FAIL!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Luckily, I've now got the patent I deserve for my hard work, so when someone else actually makes it work, their money all belong to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1) come up with an idea
2) Patent it without building a prototype
3) Now try to build a prototype.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
On a related note, am I the only one who finds the use of "now" when discussing something that happened in the past annoying/jarring?
"They then set out to..." sounds a lot better to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
From the article. Seems a clear sequence to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zero Sum
Unless you're a lawyer, in which case it's a jobs program. Mike, why do you want to kill jobs in this country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zero Sum
However, if individuals engage in voluntary exchange then said individuals are able to produce more than if they worked alone. In economics this is called "comparitive advantage" and it is how wealth (and more jobs) are created.
For further explanation of this, I highly recommend reading the short book "Not a Zero-Sum Game: The Paradox of Exchange" by Manuel F. Ayau which can be downloaded and read for free [HERE].
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I went around a busy park robbing people of all the money in their wallets with a knife. I made over $10,000 from robbing over 100 people.
Then someone I drew the knife on fought back. In our fighting the guy kicked my wallet full of stolen money down a storm drain, and then he left without giving me the money in his wallet!
I demand justice! I demand the courts award me the $10,000 I lost from the man who dared to fight back against me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Crazy world we live in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
~ Ragnar Danneskjold - Atlas Shrugged ~
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Except... many of the framers of the Constitution did not want this added because they knew the provision would be used to prevent innovation, not promote it.
Despite the wording, the provision was still a derivative (infringement!) of British laws. The difference being the very word "promote", implying (but has always been ignored) patents were not to be used to hinder.
I'm sure the framers are shaking their heads right now, disgusted in both government, for failing to fix the problem, and for Americans who abuse each other over a dollar bill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"it's about time we fixed it."
But, wait: as ever you've signaled a pulled punch: "it's about time we fixed it". ... ABOUT time, eh? -- Ya got nothin' but more complainin'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's about time we fixed it."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's about time we fixed it."
Surely its the job of the entrepreneurs?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's about time we fixed it."
I think that would be an excellent start.
Personally, I'd like to see patents abolished altogether, but I know that would never happen.
Of course, your M.O. is to move the goalposts or somesuch, or say my post is invalid because I'm not Mike. Anything to avoid addressing the actual content of my post. Have a nice life. May you live forever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "it's about time we fixed it."
Actually I don't think it is impossible. You only have to look at the exponential increase in the cost of patent litigation to realise that:
1) It will inevitably stop at some point. (Or it will bring down civilisation.)
2) The only effective way to stop it is to abolish it completely. See how difficult it was to kill just one smallish patent troll when you had them already bang to rights.
The consequence is that sooner or later it will be abolished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's about time we fixed it."
But, wait: as ever you've signaled a pulled punch: "it's about time we fixed it". ... ABOUT time, eh? -- Ya got nothin' but more complainin'.
Yes, that's right, we've never, ever suggested possible solutions... oh, wait:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120712/18322919680/judge-posner-mission-to-fix-patents-w e-have-some-suggestions.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why Bad Patents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why Bad Patents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And it has come to pass
This is exactly was is allowed with software patents, and is exactly the result that we have seen as a consequence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And it has come to pass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quackery�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent trolls
considering getting rid of the USPTO (which would put me out of business, but be good for the US).
So, maybe we should whine less and do more??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
See the little snippet from Patentlyo below:
"Patent Bobo said...
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20130201/16463921862/bad-economics-confusi ng-correlation-causation-when-it-comes-to-patents-innovation.html
Reply Feb 25, 2013 at 06:38 AM
anon said in reply to Patent Bobo...
Patent Bobo,
Techdirt? Consider the source and please supply that short (very short) list of one modern advanced country that has seen the light and eliminated all IP laws.
Just one.
Please.
If there were even just one, then that cause-correlation claptrap you are so fond of might, just might, be more than dust-kicking.
Come back and c_rrp again real soon."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easy one to answer.
Just one.
Please.
If there were even just one, then that cause-correlation claptrap you are so fond of might, just might, be more than dust-kicking."
The answer is the same as for any vital area of our lives. Illustration: Automobiles at one time were a leading cause of death in this country. Did we eliminate autos? No, we worked to fix; well, reduce; the problem.
Faced with appalling IP laws and usage world wide; should we just opt out, thereby giving the bad guys the victory? Hardly! If all the world would come to their senses and fix or abandon IP (I favor fix, but I AM an IP attorney (a good one, I might add, and appalled by IP laws as they exist).
If you had been actually listening, that is the message I get from Techdirt. Don't ignore the problem by opting out, FIX it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]