Nebraska Attorney General Sued For Trying To Stop Patent Troll
from the patent-trolls-getting-aggressive dept
Earlier this year, we noted that Vermont had declared war on patent trolls, arguing that patent trolling violated state consumer protection laws (and then passing a further law against patent trolling). More recently, the state of Minnesota made it clear that patent trolls aren't welcome there either. Nebraska's Attorney General Jon Bruning has tried a similar strategy, sending a cease-and-desist to at least one patent troll for violating state consumer protection laws and speaking out against patent trolls.Activision TV (who appears to be unrelated to video gaming company Activision), using patents like US Patent 7,369,058 and US Patent 8,330,613 relating to digital displays, has been demanding license fees from a variety of companies. Bruning stepped in to let Activision and its lawyers know that they needed to cease and desist and were potentially violating Nebraska law, by using "false, misleading or deceptive statements" in seeking licensing fees. The letter also notes that this may be a form of "baseless harassment" and that the demands for licensing letters "serve to advance no valid legal purpose."
In response, it appears Activision has decided to get even more aggressive. As reader Nate sent in, Activision turned around and sued Bruning and some of his colleagues, arguing that he unfairly referred to them as a "patent troll" without doing a thorough investigation first. The filing, embedded below, is quite long, but goes on and on and on (and on and on -- making you wonder if Activision's lawyers get paid per word) about how unfair it is to be labeled a patent troll. It also argues that Bruning is attempting to stifle their First Amendment rights (along with their Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights as well). Apparently they believe that shaking a company down for "licensing" fees is protected speech.
Reading the lawsuit and comparing it to the letter that Bruning sent, it appears like a massive overreach by Activision -- and while I have my issues with how states' attorneys general will often act, this actually appears to be a legitimate case of trying to stop the aggressive use of questionable patents to demand money from lots of different companies.
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: jon bruning, nebraska, patent trolls
Companies: activision tv
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I can see the problems this article will cause when people may scrape a subsection and post it elsewhere on the interwebs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Plaintiff is a corporation.
Plaintiff's constitutional rights (First, Fifth, Fourteenth) were violated.
So it's definitive that corporations are people? A corporation has the right to vote? A corporation can bear arms?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It'll also help deal couples deal with the #1 reason for divorce, money problems. One 'spouse' can simply 'buy' the other 'spouse' out of the financially troubled 'marriage' corporation, or they can have their 'marriage' corporation declare bankruptcy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
No business should ever be able to shield the person/people running it. And that includes public corporations such as cities and even nations. Such protections place individuals 'above the law' (*) which (eventually) will completely destroy both the rule of law and democracy as a whole.
The single biggest mistake ever made was to give corporations a set of 'rights' - and especially allowing those 'rights' to _ever_ override human rights in any way.
*(no trademark/copyright infringement intended, sigh)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
BUT, you are correct, corporations should not be able to shield it's bosses/people that run it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
As the case was getting worse and worse for the Commissioner in question eventually they made me go away by "seeing" the default judgement in the case and paid me in full, thus the corruption was hand-waved away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't know what we're going to do to make money, but you gave me an awesome idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"You're violating my first amendment rights to say whatever I want to earn money officer. My threats to publish highly embarrassing information if I don't get paid a million dollars are all free speech!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right! AGs enforce existing laws against unearned income.
So, Mike: start reading up on the New Deal! When Roosevelt saved capitalism from money manipulators, 'cause that's exactly what's needed yet again. All that crap you learned in college was about manipulating money, not producing goods.
The solution for most societal ills is HIGH INCOME TAX RATES. -- WAGES should not be taxed at all! Income in statute means unearned income.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So that's where he's been hiding....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is there precedent on the reasonableness of an attorney filing a claim based on a corporation's "first amendment rights" to commit fraud? It's 'commercial speech', which doesn't have the protections of a natural person's speech. It hardly seems like a 'novel legal theory'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cry my a river, troll. You are what you are, don't act surprised when people call you on it.
http://iptrolltracker2.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/my-tax-dollars-at-work-us-govt-tells-us-what- we-already-know/
Just sayin,
IPTT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All I can do
And if it wanted to start with ootb, I wouldn't object.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
another biased article
infringers definition of 'questionable patents': someone else's
“patent troll”
infringers and their paid puppets’ definition of ‘patent troll’:
anyone who has the nerve to sue us for stealing their invention
This is just spin control by large infringers to cover up their theft.
The patent system now teeters on the brink of lawlessness. Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, shell company, etc. It all means one thing: “we’re using your invention and we’re not going to stop or pay”. It’s a pure red herring by large invention thieves and their paid puppets to kill any inventor support system. Their goal is to legalize theft. The fact is, many of the large multinationals and their puppets who defame inventors in this way themselves make no products in the US or create any American jobs and it is their continued blatant theft which makes it impossible for the true creators to do so. To them the only patents that are legitimate are their own -if they have any. Meanwhile, the huge multinationals ship more and more US jobs overseas.
It’s about property rights. They should not only be for the rich and powerful -campaign contributors. Our founders: Jefferson, Franklin, Madison and others felt so strongly about the rights of inventors that they included inventors rights to their creations and discoveries in the Constitution. They understood the trade off. Inventors are given a limited monopoly and in turn society gets the benefits of their inventions (telephone, computer, airplane, automobile, lighting, etc) into perpetuity and the jobs the commercialization of those inventions bring. For 200 years the patent system has not only fueled the US economy, but the world’s. If we weaken the patent system, we force inventors underground like Stradivarius (anyone know how to make a Stradivarius violin?) and in turn weaken our economy and job creation. Worse yet, we destroy the American dream -the ability to prosper from our ingenuity for the benefit of our families and communities. To kill or weaken the patent system is to kill their futures. Show me a country with weak or ineffective property rights and I’ll show you a weak economy with high unemployment. If we cannot own the product of our minds or labors, what can we be said to truly own. Life and liberty are fundamentally tied to and in fact based on property rights. Our very lives are inseparably tied to our property.
Prior to the Supreme Court case eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the eBay decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Essentially, large infringers now have your gun and all the bullets. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don’t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back into the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all patentees, large and small.
Those wishing to help fight big business giveaways should contact us as below and join the fight as we are building a network of inventors and other stakeholders to lobby Congress to restore property rights for all patent owners -large and small.
For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org/default.html#pt.
http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/art icle/142741
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1792442
https://www.facebook.com/pi.ausa.5
http://piausa.wor dpress.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Troll
Now, There are 1000's of people using his patent without paying for it. If you read the court pleading you will see, that they contacted the offenders a number of times, telling them they can license the technology or remove it with no further issues. In each case that is filed the companies refuse to believe they are infringing. Most of these people think there is no way this patten is valid. The problem is as each company will find out the patten is valid and they are voilating it.
I look at this as Microsoft fighting to keep you from using their software illegally, or the record/movie industry suing a 12 year old for downloading music illegally. We all thought how ridiculous until a couple of thousand people got a bill for thousands for doings it.
There is no difference in what Activision is trying to do. He is telling the infringers to stop stealing his patent or pay him to use it. As a business executive I hope he wins. He gave them an opportunity to stop or pay him and they said see you in court.
Only time will tell whether Activision wins but many analyst believe this dog has a case and will prevail in most of his suits. Oh, and as for the Attorney General, I love that the judge told him to sit down and shut-up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
whining about Patent infringment
I have followed this whining about theft of patents and want to be clear. A former family member of mine created the gas mask. He was black so he couldn't patent it in the US because blacks were not allowed at that time. So if someone today invents something of value why not enforce that with every fiber you have. The people that are whining believe they should be able to steal the patent and not be sued. Really! Do you damn homework before creating something and you won't be sued. The fact that visionary's patent things that real people might use is what America was founded on ask Ford, Boeing, Harley Davidson. These aren't Trolls they are really smart people that invented something long before you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]