3 ms·

So Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point, SonicWall, and Juniper Networks paid millions to Sable. Sable paid $225k to Cloudflare, and won't use them again against anyone

So Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point, SonicWall, and Juniper Networks paid millions to Sable. Sable paid $225k to Cloudflare, and won't use them again against anyone. Sounds like they don't need to. Well played Sable. Enjoy your money. I really wish we could publicly shame the people behind these abuses or provide some other incentive to correct bad behavior other than speeding-ticket sized fines. In other news, as an investor, this tells me Cloudflare is technologically ahead of the other older companies who apparently were not sure they could defend against the claims.

ivanbakel 2y ago
>In other news, as an investor, this tells me Cloudflare is technologically ahead of the other older companies who apparently were not sure they could defend against the claims. That feels like a highly specious takeaway from this court case. Companies settle against trolls because litigation isn't free to fight. It can make very good financial sense (and even be encouraged by investors who don't want to see a company in the courts for years, as Cloudflare was.) I would be highly interested to see the breakdown of what it cost in manhours, fees, prizes to Project Jengo, etc. versus the payout from Sable to fight this particular case for Cloudflare, and whether they even came close to breaking even just on this case alone. Likely their decision somewhat hinged on an estimate of what it might cost to settle all other patent disputes in the future, and the belief that fighting this case is actually saving them much more money down the line (but how much?).
- cryptonym 2y ago
  While fighting trolls is morally the good thing to do, there is also an image/marketing benefit,. That can help balance risks.
- swiftcoder 2y ago
  On the flip side, there's some napkin math to be done about the costs saved by any future patent trolls who are averted by going all scorched earth this time around...
AlbertCory 2y ago
> I really wish we could publicly shame the people behind these abuses or provide some other incentive to correct bad behavior other than speeding-ticket sized fines. They are beyond shame, believe me. There have already been TV news segments about how their "place of business" in West Texas is just a PO Box.
pavel_lishin 2y ago
> I really wish we could publicly shame the people behind these abuses or provide some other incentive to correct bad behavior other than speeding-ticket sized fines. Right? This seems like out-and-out fraud to me.
Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
Sable probably spent a lot of money on fighting Cloudflare. It seems to me like they nearly bankrupted themselves doing it, and $225K was all they had left to pay Cloudflare's legal fees.
epolanski 2y ago
The money from other settlements likely ended up in shareholders pockets, not into sable's reserves. Thus, a company like that is likely limited to have just budget for legal and little less. This is also done in order so if they lose a trial and have to pay damages they can't.
- Xeoncross 2y ago
  That's my point: It's a net win for the actual people behind Sable.
throw16180339 2y ago
> In other news, as an investor, this tells me Cloudflare is technologically ahead of the other older companies who apparently were not sure they could defend against the claims. This is the wrong takeaway. Litigation is expensive and uncertain, especially in the Western District of Texas. It's a troll friendly district with a troll friendly judge. These other companies paid up because it's a rational choice to do so. Cloudflare chose to fight, but it probably would have been cheaper to settle.
- ric2b 2y ago
  But isn't the burden of proof, and thus most of the litigation costs, on the patent troll? The court can't just assume that you're violating their patent because they say so, they have to prove it to a reasonable level, right?
  - throw16180339 2y ago
    > But isn't the burden of proof, and thus most of the litigation costs, on the patent troll? Litigants in the US are responsible for their own legal fees. It's quite common for patent trolls to ask for an amount that's cheaper than going to court. > The court can't just assume that you're violating their patent because they say so, they have to prove it to a reasonable level, right? They have to prove it, but the Western District of Texas is notoriously friendly to plaintiffs in patent lawsuits. Judge Albright handles about 40% of cases; he's biased as hell (https://www2.law.temple.edu/10q/how-the-west-became-the-east-the-patent-litigation-explosion-in-the-western-district-of-texas/ https://www2.law.temple.edu/10q/how-the-west-became-the-east...).

ivanbakel 2y ago

>In other news, as an investor, this tells me Cloudflare is technologically ahead of the other older companies who apparently were not sure they could defend against the claims. That feels like a highly specious takeaway from this court case. Companies settle against trolls because litigation isn't free to fight. It can make very good financial sense (and even be encouraged by investors who don't want to see a company in the courts for years, as Cloudflare was.) I would be highly interested to see the breakdown of what it cost in manhours, fees, prizes to Project Jengo, etc. versus the payout from Sable to fight this particular case for Cloudflare, and whether they even came close to breaking even just on this case alone. Likely their decision somewhat hinged on an estimate of what it might cost to settle all other patent disputes in the future, and the belief that fighting this case is actually saving them much more money down the line (but how much?).

cryptonym 2y ago
While fighting trolls is morally the good thing to do, there is also an image/marketing benefit,. That can help balance risks.
swiftcoder 2y ago
On the flip side, there's some napkin math to be done about the costs saved by any future patent trolls who are averted by going all scorched earth this time around...

AlbertCory 2y ago

> I really wish we could publicly shame the people behind these abuses or provide some other incentive to correct bad behavior other than speeding-ticket sized fines. They are beyond shame, believe me. There have already been TV news segments about how their "place of business" in West Texas is just a PO Box.

pavel_lishin 2y ago

> I really wish we could publicly shame the people behind these abuses or provide some other incentive to correct bad behavior other than speeding-ticket sized fines. Right? This seems like out-and-out fraud to me.

Sohcahtoa82 2y ago

Sable probably spent a lot of money on fighting Cloudflare. It seems to me like they nearly bankrupted themselves doing it, and $225K was all they had left to pay Cloudflare's legal fees.

epolanski 2y ago

The money from other settlements likely ended up in shareholders pockets, not into sable's reserves. Thus, a company like that is likely limited to have just budget for legal and little less. This is also done in order so if they lose a trial and have to pay damages they can't.

Xeoncross 2y ago
That's my point: It's a net win for the actual people behind Sable.

throw16180339 2y ago

> In other news, as an investor, this tells me Cloudflare is technologically ahead of the other older companies who apparently were not sure they could defend against the claims. This is the wrong takeaway. Litigation is expensive and uncertain, especially in the Western District of Texas. It's a troll friendly district with a troll friendly judge. These other companies paid up because it's a rational choice to do so. Cloudflare chose to fight, but it probably would have been cheaper to settle.

ric2b 2y ago
But isn't the burden of proof, and thus most of the litigation costs, on the patent troll? The court can't just assume that you're violating their patent because they say so, they have to prove it to a reasonable level, right?
- throw16180339 2y ago
  > But isn't the burden of proof, and thus most of the litigation costs, on the patent troll? Litigants in the US are responsible for their own legal fees. It's quite common for patent trolls to ask for an amount that's cheaper than going to court. > The court can't just assume that you're violating their patent because they say so, they have to prove it to a reasonable level, right? They have to prove it, but the Western District of Texas is notoriously friendly to plaintiffs in patent lawsuits. Judge Albright handles about 40% of cases; he's biased as hell (https://www2.law.temple.edu/10q/how-the-west-became-the-east-the-patent-litigation-explosion-in-the-western-district-of-texas/ https://www2.law.temple.edu/10q/how-the-west-became-the-east...).