4 ms·
The only way to fix situations like this is to make it possible to extract heavy penalties for frivolous patent litigation. The cost benefit analysis will alway
by paddw 3y ago
The only way to fix situations like this is to make it possible to extract heavy penalties for frivolous patent litigation. The cost benefit analysis will always fall too much in favor of patent trolls otherwise.
- Zigurd 3y agoThat is a fine idea in the abstract. But there are a lot of high-value patents that are, for example, very badly written, or they have other attributes that make them vulnerable. This makes them vulnerable to a shakedown. Discerning if a badly written patent deserves to stand would give me a bigger headache than the already soul crushing task of reading such patents.
- paddw 3y agoI am not sure if I understand your point. Are you saying that poorly written patents should be litigated, and that such a law would make this much harder to do? I can see how something like this could be an issue. Ultimately, I don't think there is a perfect solution, but I feel the current way the system works is very far from optimal in its costs and benefits.
- Zigurd 3y agoI do not think there is a clear answer to this. I can understand some people taking the position that a poorly written, hard to understand patent does not deserve to survive, especially if if the people who wrote it are trying to be clever by having it mean what they say it means if it gets litigated. OTOH it can also be argued that trolls posing as public interest groups are operating in bad faith and the fact a patent is hard to understand has been par for the course for so long, that making patent holders review their patents for clearly defensible language is unfair.
- freejazz 3y agoEFF is an industry group posing as a public interest group, operating in bad faith in order to dissolve copyright and patent law.
- freejazz 3y ago> Are you saying that poorly written patents should be litigated, Why shouldn't they? Courts don't necessarily invalidate contracts just because one flaw might be present. The point of the system isn't to just invalidate patents because someone else wants to... it's to fairly adjudicate the boundaries of granted patents. You are starting from 2nd base!