3 ms·
Thanks, that is definitely related (and admirable). But, in my scheme the proposed pool would sue anyone who sues for software patent infringement, regardless
by w01fe 15y ago
Thanks, that is definitely related (and admirable). But, in my scheme the proposed pool would sue anyone who sues for software patent infringement, regardless of whether the original suit has anything to do with patents in the pool. To receive this coverage, the target of the suit might be required to donate their own patents to the pool first. This could create a positive feedback loop, to quickly grow the patent pool to the size necessary to have broad influence.
- Jabbles 15y agoPresumably with the exception of counter-suing companies that have sued you? Companies build patent portfolios so that other companies will be wary of suing them for fear of being counter-sued (simplification). If being a member of this pool removed your ability to even act defensively, I don't think it would achieve its goals.
- abraham 15y agoI understood it as the company or the pool could counter-sue with the entire pool rather then just the portfolio originally owned by the company.
- w01fe 15y agoExactly. Joining the pool effectively signs away your rights to make offensive lawsuits, in exchange for gaining the rights of the entire pool for defensive purposes.
- redm 15y agoPatent Trolls do not make or sell any products so it would not be possible to counter sue them.
- nextparadigms 15y agoYou're right about patent trolls, but this would allow those companies to have access to a vast amount of patents, so it should become harder for patent trolls to sue any of them, although far from impossible. But the patent pool would be mostly so those companies don't sue each other. So many companies in the tech industry are suing each other right now. It's ridiculous.
- binarybits 15y agoHaving access to a large patent pool provides zero protection against NPEs ("patent trolls").