6 ms·

Not only their assets, but also their right to practice as lawyers... the founders were reported to bar association in two states for ethics violations... "wha

Not only their assets, but also their right to practice as lawyers... the founders were reported to bar association in two states for ethics violations... "what safeguards should be put in place to make sure that attorneys who take the oath are held to a standard beyond mere greed or base opportunism" Cloudflare really is making the world a better place in this case, by fighting back against the kinds of legal weasel who exists purely to be a money leech with no benefit to anyone but themselves.

vesinisa 7y ago
Unfortunately, the challenges before the bar associations were apparently not successful. Their wording is careful since "disciplinary proceedings in front of bar associations are generally confidential", but they do remark that "it will take a broader change in orientation by these professional associations" before even obvious patent trolling is considered legal malpractice.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  We already have barratry laws on the books. Someone just needs to enforce them. Advancing disingenuous arguments in court should be an automatic year's suspension.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    What is a "disingenuous argument?" Is it like reading the phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" to mean something less than that based on a clearly set-off explanatory clause in front? (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) The standard for permissible arguments in court is having a good faith basis in law or fact, or a good faith argument for extending or changing the law. It's not clear to me that's wrong. Fee-splitting with non-lawyers is the bigger issue. That is impermissible for all sorts of good reasons.
    - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
      Court officers take an oath not to waste the court's time. Knowingly advancing baseless claims that are only meant to scare a victim into settling is a violation of that oath. This isn't hard stuff. The priesthood just doesn't want to hold its members accountable.
      - rayiner 7y ago
        My point is that "disingenuous" sweeps quite a bit more broadly than "baseless."
    - notSupplied 7y ago
      If it was so obvious, why did you omit the clause?
    - areyousure 7y ago
      > Fee-splitting with non-lawyers is the bigger issue. That is impermissible for all sorts of good reasons. Out of (sincere) curiosity, what are some of those reasons? Thanks.
  - mr_toad 7y ago
    What some of these outfits are up to is more than just barratry, it’s extortion and racketeering. I’d like to see them brought up on RICO charges.
- egdod 7y ago
  Patent trolling isn’t considered improper at all. I would hope that the complaints to the bar had a little more in them than “this lawyer is doing something we don’t like but that isn’t actually against the rules.”
  - vesinisa 7y ago
    Don't read too much into my paraphrasing, as per the article they did in fact raise substantiated malpractice complaints. The troll had entered into a forbidden profit sharing arrangement with a non-lawyer, and was being purposely ambiguous if it is a law firm at all.
  - agency 7y ago
    Per the post, their complaints were based on rules prohibiting attorneys from splitting contingency fees with non-attorneys. The patent they were asserting against Cloudflare was purchased from the inventor for $1 plus “other good and valuable consideration.” As part of their defense to the ethics complaint Blackbird asserted that they do not use contingency fee arrangements for the patents it acquires, but do something "similar."
  - crispyambulance 7y ago
    > Patent trolling isn’t considered improper at all. That's for the bar to decide. But what do you mean "... at all" ? The sad truth is that many hard working companies have had to fork over thousands of dollars to law firms that happen to hold patents but which don't have any means or even intent to deploy the inventions in those patents. These law firms simply exist to extract money by virtue of holding vaguely-worded garbage patents. THAT's what a patent troll is and THAT is improper.
    - egdod 7y ago
      What I mean is that it isn’t against the rules. You’re welcome to think it’s a little shady (and I won’t disagree), but it’s not improper. What’s improper about creating liquidity in the market for inventions? And patents don’t require the holder to make or sell anything—they give the holder the right to prevent others from doing so.
- htrp 7y ago
  Doesn't matter if the disciplinary action is successful, the fact that cloudflare seizes the initiative is impressive.

vesinisa 7y ago

Unfortunately, the challenges before the bar associations were apparently not successful. Their wording is careful since "disciplinary proceedings in front of bar associations are generally confidential", but they do remark that "it will take a broader change in orientation by these professional associations" before even obvious patent trolling is considered legal malpractice.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
We already have barratry laws on the books. Someone just needs to enforce them. Advancing disingenuous arguments in court should be an automatic year's suspension.
- rayiner 7y ago
  What is a "disingenuous argument?" Is it like reading the phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" to mean something less than that based on a clearly set-off explanatory clause in front? (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) The standard for permissible arguments in court is having a good faith basis in law or fact, or a good faith argument for extending or changing the law. It's not clear to me that's wrong. Fee-splitting with non-lawyers is the bigger issue. That is impermissible for all sorts of good reasons.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    Court officers take an oath not to waste the court's time. Knowingly advancing baseless claims that are only meant to scare a victim into settling is a violation of that oath. This isn't hard stuff. The priesthood just doesn't want to hold its members accountable.
    - rayiner 7y ago
      My point is that "disingenuous" sweeps quite a bit more broadly than "baseless."
  - notSupplied 7y ago
    If it was so obvious, why did you omit the clause?
  - areyousure 7y ago
    > Fee-splitting with non-lawyers is the bigger issue. That is impermissible for all sorts of good reasons. Out of (sincere) curiosity, what are some of those reasons? Thanks.
- mr_toad 7y ago
  What some of these outfits are up to is more than just barratry, it’s extortion and racketeering. I’d like to see them brought up on RICO charges.
egdod 7y ago
Patent trolling isn’t considered improper at all. I would hope that the complaints to the bar had a little more in them than “this lawyer is doing something we don’t like but that isn’t actually against the rules.”
- vesinisa 7y ago
  Don't read too much into my paraphrasing, as per the article they did in fact raise substantiated malpractice complaints. The troll had entered into a forbidden profit sharing arrangement with a non-lawyer, and was being purposely ambiguous if it is a law firm at all.
- agency 7y ago
  Per the post, their complaints were based on rules prohibiting attorneys from splitting contingency fees with non-attorneys. The patent they were asserting against Cloudflare was purchased from the inventor for $1 plus “other good and valuable consideration.” As part of their defense to the ethics complaint Blackbird asserted that they do not use contingency fee arrangements for the patents it acquires, but do something "similar."
- crispyambulance 7y ago
  > Patent trolling isn’t considered improper at all. That's for the bar to decide. But what do you mean "... at all" ? The sad truth is that many hard working companies have had to fork over thousands of dollars to law firms that happen to hold patents but which don't have any means or even intent to deploy the inventions in those patents. These law firms simply exist to extract money by virtue of holding vaguely-worded garbage patents. THAT's what a patent troll is and THAT is improper.
  - egdod 7y ago
    What I mean is that it isn’t against the rules. You’re welcome to think it’s a little shady (and I won’t disagree), but it’s not improper. What’s improper about creating liquidity in the market for inventions? And patents don’t require the holder to make or sell anything—they give the holder the right to prevent others from doing so.
htrp 7y ago
Doesn't matter if the disciplinary action is successful, the fact that cloudflare seizes the initiative is impressive.