4 ms·
The point is that patents are commonly used as a defensive tool, and any good counsel would tell you such. While having a patent is not a defense to an infringe
by querk44 2y ago
The point is that patents are commonly used as a defensive tool, and any good counsel would tell you such. While having a patent is not a defense to an infringement allegation, patents can act as a deterrent to others suing you. The idea is that having your own patents discourages competitors from bringing suit because they will fear that you will turn around and counter-sue them for infringement of your patents. This, of course, does not however address the problem of non-practicing entities.
- freejazz 2y agoI'm not sure why you make the assumption that in a patent infringement suit, either parties both have the same practice, or one of them is a NPE. There's no basis for such an assumption. I'm a patent litigator and this doesn't match my experience at all. It is true for very large companies with broad business practices that could be susceptible to a large IP portfolio from a similarly-sized competitor, but to talk of it like it is a practical defense is unrealistic and reflective of a lack of understanding of how patents are usually asserted. It's something for a GC to keep in mind, but isn't really relevant to what would be common advice to anyone running a business that wasn't one the largest in the world.