3 ms·
The patent holder would be a company operating in the same market as apple, having a viable market for products somewhat related to the patents they hold. Eg.,
by mjburgess 5y ago
The patent holder would be a company operating in the same market as apple, having a viable market for products somewhat related to the patents they hold. Eg., an electronics company.
If they can't meet that condition, sell the patent to a company who can. They'll actually innovate with it (ie., use the licence feeds to fund something useful).
- MikeDelta 5y agoThis is a great condition that would invalidate all patent-trolls.
- salawat 5y agoThis means all patents will eventually flow to a single holder over time (the one most able to offer a patent buyout pipeline). This is a terrible idea without strong anti-trust and forced break-up and anti-consolidation enforcement. I hate patent trolls too, but if your two outcomes are A) all you'll get is a bunch of umbrella companies coupling a legal firm to a modest widget mill. This is a great way to proliferate e-trash though and B ) The leviathan in town sets up a window to buy out every patent they can to save no long term litigation costs... Maybe your system is flawed to begin with.
- Brian_K_White 5y agoI don't see how "operating in the same field" or even "somewhat related" can be determined or valid. Tons of technology is used in fields other than where it originated. Probably a lawyer didn't legitimately invent an important new chemistry for a glue, but a baker could, or a landscaper, etc. And math and process/logistics can come from anyone anywhere at any time, even a lawyer. This may be hard to define and be correct and fair about it. Then again... in that case they'd be the originator which could be a special status vs purchased as an asset. Maybe not so hard to manage after all.