4 ms·

You can only determine the exact IP revenue when someone is paying explicitly for the use of that IP. If, however, I'm selling, say, a very complex machine, whe

by pakitan 10y ago

You can only determine the exact IP revenue when someone is paying explicitly for the use of that IP. If, however, I'm selling, say, a very complex machine, where I hold a patent over a small component of that machine, how would you determine the value of my patent? > Therefore, if at the end of the year neither yourself nor anyone else had made any money from your IP, just assign zero How would that solve the issue of patents being used as a offensive weapon? Under your proposal if a patent troll has thousands of patents and has made zero revenue on them, they would pay zero tax. On the other hand if they made money, they will happily pay the tax.

themacks 10y ago
I think what he is getting at is if the patent owner ascribes no value to the patents for tax purposes, then the same lack of value applies if they attempt to collect damages for IP infringement. This would force the patent troll to set the value to something balances so that they can afford the taxes while still recouping enough infringement damages.
beagle3 10y ago
> where I hold a patent over a small component of that machine, how would you determine the value of my patent? I want YOU to value that patent (and the tax just make sure it is not arbitrarily high). When you sue for damages, you must have that estimate. I just want to force that to happen in a way that discourages over estimation. > How would that solve the issue of patents being used as a offensive weapon? Under your proposal if a patent troll has thousands of patents and has made zero revenue on them, they would pay zero tax. On the other hand if they made money, they will happily pay the tax. Court cases take years to start (and resolve). The patent troll's leverage is "if you don't license, I'll sue". If they have to pay $10,000 for every $1M patent, they will not be able to afford their current business model - they will not be able to sue for more than they paid taxes for. (The lawsuit is likely - and perhaps should legally be required - to be filed only after tax is paid).

by pakitan 10y ago

themacks 10y ago

I think what he is getting at is if the patent owner ascribes no value to the patents for tax purposes, then the same lack of value applies if they attempt to collect damages for IP infringement. This would force the patent troll to set the value to something balances so that they can afford the taxes while still recouping enough infringement damages.

beagle3 10y ago

> where I hold a patent over a small component of that machine, how would you determine the value of my patent? I want YOU to value that patent (and the tax just make sure it is not arbitrarily high). When you sue for damages, you must have that estimate. I just want to force that to happen in a way that discourages over estimation. > How would that solve the issue of patents being used as a offensive weapon? Under your proposal if a patent troll has thousands of patents and has made zero revenue on them, they would pay zero tax. On the other hand if they made money, they will happily pay the tax. Court cases take years to start (and resolve). The patent troll's leverage is "if you don't license, I'll sue". If they have to pay $10,000 for every $1M patent, they will not be able to afford their current business model - they will not be able to sue for more than they paid taxes for. (The lawsuit is likely - and perhaps should legally be required - to be filed only after tax is paid).