3 ms·

Without knowing the content of the patents(merely that they are valid) - would you be able to differentiate between a patent troll and someone with a great pate

Without knowing the content of the patents(merely that they are valid) - would you be able to differentiate between a patent troll and someone with a great patent that wants their hard work licensed instead of taken for free?

coldpie 5y ago
Who is taking anything for free? Do you think people go read through the patent database to get product ideas? If I create a product and bring it to market without any knowledge of your patent, why should I pay you just because you invented it earlier and then sat on it?
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  I don't think any judge is going to care much if you say you didn't read their patent before infringing on their patent.
  - gpm 5y ago
    They will, intentional infringement is worse than accidental infringement, but both are illegal. (not a lawyer...)
    - oh_sigh 5y ago
      Sure, but I meant that it won't materially affect the finding of whether infringement occurred, willful or accidental.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        That wasn't the question. It was whether hard work is being taken for free.
        oh_sigh 5y ago
        I know what the question was since I literally asked it
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  It's not _just_ because you invented it earlier, you also have to disclose it in a way that makes it workable. The disclosure is supposed to drive innovation and use of innovations; that's the patent deal, the monopoly is "paid" for with disclosure. Aside, in the UK there's compulsory licensing (UKPA Section 48x to prevent people from inventing stuff and refusing to license it (at reasonable terms), too.
  - nrdvana 5y ago
    > “The disclosure is supposed to drive innovation” And that is the grand joke of the patent system.
  - coldpie 5y ago
    I would be surprised if this happened even once in the history of the patent system, and I feel confident stating it has never happened in the past 50 years. Patents do not drive innovation, they restrict it and erect barriers to entry.

coldpie 5y ago

Who is taking anything for free? Do you think people go read through the patent database to get product ideas? If I create a product and bring it to market without any knowledge of your patent, why should I pay you just because you invented it earlier and then sat on it?

oh_sigh 5y ago
I don't think any judge is going to care much if you say you didn't read their patent before infringing on their patent.
- gpm 5y ago
  They will, intentional infringement is worse than accidental infringement, but both are illegal. (not a lawyer...)
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    Sure, but I meant that it won't materially affect the finding of whether infringement occurred, willful or accidental.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      That wasn't the question. It was whether hard work is being taken for free.
      - oh_sigh 5y ago
        I know what the question was since I literally asked it
pbhjpbhj 5y ago
It's not _just_ because you invented it earlier, you also have to disclose it in a way that makes it workable. The disclosure is supposed to drive innovation and use of innovations; that's the patent deal, the monopoly is "paid" for with disclosure. Aside, in the UK there's compulsory licensing (UKPA Section 48x to prevent people from inventing stuff and refusing to license it (at reasonable terms), too.
- nrdvana 5y ago
  > “The disclosure is supposed to drive innovation” And that is the grand joke of the patent system.
- coldpie 5y ago
  I would be surprised if this happened even once in the history of the patent system, and I feel confident stating it has never happened in the past 50 years. Patents do not drive innovation, they restrict it and erect barriers to entry.