3 ms·
This is exactly how Intellectual Ventures, one of the biggest if not the biggest patent trolls of all time was started. We really, really do not need another on
by Kliment 13y ago
This is exactly how Intellectual Ventures, one of the biggest if not the biggest patent trolls of all time was started. We really, really do not need another one of those fuckheads.
- StavrosK 13y agoReally? Do you have a summary of/mind telling the story?
- Kliment 13y agoThe best reconstruction of the events was published last year in Stanford Technology law Review. It's available at http://stlr.stanford.edu/pdf/feldman-giants-among-us.pdf http://stlr.stanford.edu/pdf/feldman-giants-among-us.pdf
- StavrosK 13y agoThat looks like an interesting (if long) read, thank you.
- mcintyre1994 13y agoI can see why this could become dangerous, but the IPA would actually make it appear surprisingly robust. Twitter have to have the inventor's permission to use the patents offensively, so a huge war chest that basically acts like a patent pool for a lot of people isn't actually a threat to those outside of it unless all their inventors decide to allow patent trolling. They also couldn't transfer them to a patent holding company to do that because the IPA holds even if the patent is sold. There are of course issues, but the idea proposed could actually be a major turning point here. A patent pool that can only be used defensively is a very interesting idea.
- Kliment 13y agoYes, but not in the hands of a single company. What happens if Twitter goes bankrupt? Does whoever acquire the assets then hold the portfolio? Do the terms of the agreement bind them? I like the idea, but having Twitter play that role is too fragile.
- atebits 13y agoYes, the IPA is bound to future owners of the patents. (It would be trivial to get around if it wasn't). And to clarify: the goal of the IPA isn't to make Twitter or any one company some blessed repository of patents. The goal is for many companies to adopt the IPA as a promise between them and their engineers.
- Kliment 13y agoHow does that actually become legally binding? If the patents are assigned to Twitter, and are later transferred to an entity that never agreed to the IPA, what actually happens? I honestly have no idea how it would work out. And I fully agree about the IPA's goal, I'm protesting against people saying that it should be treated as a benevolent patent pool now. On the whole, I think the entire patent bullshit is moronic and should be annihilated at first opportunity, but that's a different story.
- atebits 13y agoCheck out section 4. If the assignee attempts to assert the patent improperly, the inventor has the right to give out licenses. The inventor's rights are permanent, not a function of who happens to own the patent.
- mcintyre1994 13y agoI absolutely agree that it shouldn't be a single company leading it, but I stand by the view that an IPA protected patent pool is an interesting idea that it would be great to see play out. But yes, as the other commenters pointed out, whoever acquires it holds the portfolio, but the rights from the IPA remain with the inventor. Note that if that weren't the case and Twitter wanted to pivot into patent trolling, they could just set up Twitter Patent Assertion Trolls and transfer all patents there. Like I said, it would be surprisingly robust.