5 ms·

I really enjoyed the most recent This American Life podcast as they revisited the topic of patent trolls (specifically Nathan Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures).

by ryandvm 13y ago

I really enjoyed the most recent This American Life podcast as they revisited the topic of patent trolls (specifically Nathan Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures). Fascinating and terrifying. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/496/when-patents-attack-part-two http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/496/w...

rscale 13y ago
The most recent Planet Money podcast is also about patent trolls, and goes into a bit more depth about the guy who declared himself a co-inventor of podcasting. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/05/31/187374157/episode-462-when-patents-hit-the-podcast http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/05/31/187374157/episode-... EFF's effort to find prior art and raise money to fight this particular troll can be found here: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/help-save-podcasting https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/help-save-podcasting
rexreed 13y ago
Yeah - my first thought was: Is it possible that the 2-part series by This American Life ("When Patents Attack") had a tangible effect here?
- skwirl 13y ago
  I doubt it. It seems to me that this American Life was responding to the fact that patent trolling was already very much on the radar, not putting it there themselves.
  - rexreed 13y ago
    But given this has been an issue for so long, why the action now? Did TAL raise something as an issue that motivated folks to call their congressmen, petition their representatives more than if TAL had not aired the episode? If it's just timing on the part of TAL, it's well timed.
    - skwirl 13y ago
      Don't get me wrong, I love This American Life, but a week before the more recent episode aired the State of Vermont passed a law to clamp down on patent trolls and its attorney general started suing patent trolls. See: http://abovethelaw.com/2013/05/vermont-declares-war-on-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-and-sues-notorious-patent-troll/ http://abovethelaw.com/2013/05/vermont-declares-war-on-paten... Obama made statements in February regarding the harm imposed by patent trolls: "On a Google Hangout in February, Obama said patent trolls abuse a system that was designed to protect inventions and foster innovation. "They don't actually produce anything themselves," Obama said. "They're just trying to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them." (http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/obama-patent-trolls/?source=cnn_bin http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/obama-...) Also, the This American Life episode just aired last weekend. I highly doubt the executive orders were written in one business day.
      - scott_s 13y ago
        Last weekend's episode was a followup to one from two years ago, so there is possibility that their work has affected public discourse.
- pionar 13y ago
  I'd say it's just coincidence. The White House doesn't decide to take a policy position like this "over the weekend". I'd bet it's been in the works for a couple months, they've just been nailing down the plan and the wording.
snorkel 13y ago
So many mind-blowing revelations in that TAL episode: * The original filer of the patent featured in the story was not the inventor of the idea but rather a partner in a failed startup around the idea, which was never realized, he then later patented his former partner's ideas, and made a lot of money from that patent since * Two defendants fought the patent infringement suit and won on a technicality: the patent was filed improperly due to random mention of another contributor to the idea who was not listed as a co-inventor * ... BUT any of the other 16 infringements defendants who had already agreed to settle their infringement claims out of court are still bound to the terms of their license agreements forever because the language of the license agreement basically asserts that they have to pay the license fees no matter if the patent in question is still valid or not. So anyone that settled out of court are trapped anyway. * There is an entire economy and market around reselling patents to the point of the current self-proclaimed owners of a given patent can not describe its origins. After listening to this episode I couldn't help but think that patents can be fixed if: 1. You should not be allowed to sell a patent. The intent of a patent is to give the inventor(s) enough lead time to develop the idea, not to create a market for ideas. 2. A patent should not be valid unless you can demonstrate it. You shouldn't be allowed to own ideas that are beyond your means to execute. 3. There should be very low limits on patent infringement damage claims thereby removing the financial incentive of using patents and anti-competitive and extortion weapons.
- anigbrowl 13y ago
  The patent system badly needs fixing, but hasty solutions lead to new problems. 1. If you can't sell a patent, but lack capital or the desire to exploit it (perhaps you have invented something more interesting in the meantime, or alternatively you've developed a serious health condition that prevents you from working), the there's a net economic loss to society because the invention languishes undeveloped for 20 years. 2. You are already required to be able to demonstrate as far as I know. Enforcing this more strictly would allow a different kind of patent trolling by large firms that wanted to grab the inventions of smaller firms/individuals for cheap or nothing by arguing that they weren't sufficiently well resourced to develop the product. 3. If you make patent infringement into an affordable cost of doing business then you're just encouraging people to infringe and pass the minimal costs along to the consumer.
spodek 13y ago
Also covered in the New Yorker yesterday: "How to Make War on Patent Trolls" -- an informative, thoughtful article, listing resources the government already has to defeat trolls but isn't much using, though it describes how Vermont is acting in at least one case. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/06/how-to-make-war-on-patent-trolls.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/06/how-t... From the article: "It is time to declare total war on patent trolls. The federal government, and the states, should do everything they can to exterminate them and to make anyone regret getting into such crooked work. The existence of trolls is entirely a product of government: they abuse a government program (the patent law), and continue to exist only thanks to government inaction." It later continues... "The one exception to the pattern of government inaction is Bill Sorrell, the Attorney General of Vermont, who, two weeks ago, filed lawsuits against MPHJ for exploiting Vermont businesses and nonprofits. He explained to me that Vermont is trying to attract new businesses to the state, and that scaring off trolls might help. “This is not anti-patent,” Sorrell said. “This is anti-abuse of patent rights. We don’t want people preying on Vermont’s small business.” The Vermont story may help create a race to the top. If Vermont succeeds in scaring trolls away, it will give companies there an advantage. And as more states act, it will be relatively worse to do business in those that don’t." It covers more than just Vermont and links to other informative resources. On another note... A major problem infrequently mentioned is that a lot of people, especially in parts of business far from R&D, see patents solely as a way to recoup private investment, not supposed to be balanced with public interest after limited times, and they use number of patents as a proxy for amount of innovation. They honestly see the system as it is now as functioning great. Many see objections to patents as objections to capitalism and business. Many of these people aren't stupid, malevolent, or self-serving. They believe in a model that no longer functions, but haven't realized that model no longer applies.
- rayiner 13y ago
  > A major problem infrequently mentioned is that a lot of people, especially in parts of business far from R&D, see patents solely as a way to recoup private investment, not supposed to be balanced with public interest after limited times, and they use number of patents as a proxy for amount of innovation. Lots of people in R&D see things this way. My friends in "Big Engineering" are proud of the number of patents they have to their name.
georgebonnr 13y ago
this.

by ryandvm 13y ago

rscale 13y ago

The most recent Planet Money podcast is also about patent trolls, and goes into a bit more depth about the guy who declared himself a co-inventor of podcasting. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/05/31/187374157/episode-462-when-patents-hit-the-podcast http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/05/31/187374157/episode-... EFF's effort to find prior art and raise money to fight this particular troll can be found here: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/help-save-podcasting https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/help-save-podcasting

rexreed 13y ago

Yeah - my first thought was: Is it possible that the 2-part series by This American Life ("When Patents Attack") had a tangible effect here?

skwirl 13y ago
I doubt it. It seems to me that this American Life was responding to the fact that patent trolling was already very much on the radar, not putting it there themselves.
- rexreed 13y ago
  But given this has been an issue for so long, why the action now? Did TAL raise something as an issue that motivated folks to call their congressmen, petition their representatives more than if TAL had not aired the episode? If it's just timing on the part of TAL, it's well timed.
  - skwirl 13y ago
    Don't get me wrong, I love This American Life, but a week before the more recent episode aired the State of Vermont passed a law to clamp down on patent trolls and its attorney general started suing patent trolls. See: http://abovethelaw.com/2013/05/vermont-declares-war-on-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-and-sues-notorious-patent-troll/ http://abovethelaw.com/2013/05/vermont-declares-war-on-paten... Obama made statements in February regarding the harm imposed by patent trolls: "On a Google Hangout in February, Obama said patent trolls abuse a system that was designed to protect inventions and foster innovation. "They don't actually produce anything themselves," Obama said. "They're just trying to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them." (http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/obama-patent-trolls/?source=cnn_bin http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/obama-...) Also, the This American Life episode just aired last weekend. I highly doubt the executive orders were written in one business day.
    - scott_s 13y ago
      Last weekend's episode was a followup to one from two years ago, so there is possibility that their work has affected public discourse.
pionar 13y ago
I'd say it's just coincidence. The White House doesn't decide to take a policy position like this "over the weekend". I'd bet it's been in the works for a couple months, they've just been nailing down the plan and the wording.

snorkel 13y ago

So many mind-blowing revelations in that TAL episode: * The original filer of the patent featured in the story was not the inventor of the idea but rather a partner in a failed startup around the idea, which was never realized, he then later patented his former partner's ideas, and made a lot of money from that patent since * Two defendants fought the patent infringement suit and won on a technicality: the patent was filed improperly due to random mention of another contributor to the idea who was not listed as a co-inventor * ... BUT any of the other 16 infringements defendants who had already agreed to settle their infringement claims out of court are still bound to the terms of their license agreements forever because the language of the license agreement basically asserts that they have to pay the license fees no matter if the patent in question is still valid or not. So anyone that settled out of court are trapped anyway. * There is an entire economy and market around reselling patents to the point of the current self-proclaimed owners of a given patent can not describe its origins. After listening to this episode I couldn't help but think that patents can be fixed if: 1. You should not be allowed to sell a patent. The intent of a patent is to give the inventor(s) enough lead time to develop the idea, not to create a market for ideas. 2. A patent should not be valid unless you can demonstrate it. You shouldn't be allowed to own ideas that are beyond your means to execute. 3. There should be very low limits on patent infringement damage claims thereby removing the financial incentive of using patents and anti-competitive and extortion weapons.

anigbrowl 13y ago
The patent system badly needs fixing, but hasty solutions lead to new problems. 1. If you can't sell a patent, but lack capital or the desire to exploit it (perhaps you have invented something more interesting in the meantime, or alternatively you've developed a serious health condition that prevents you from working), the there's a net economic loss to society because the invention languishes undeveloped for 20 years. 2. You are already required to be able to demonstrate as far as I know. Enforcing this more strictly would allow a different kind of patent trolling by large firms that wanted to grab the inventions of smaller firms/individuals for cheap or nothing by arguing that they weren't sufficiently well resourced to develop the product. 3. If you make patent infringement into an affordable cost of doing business then you're just encouraging people to infringe and pass the minimal costs along to the consumer.

spodek 13y ago

Also covered in the New Yorker yesterday: "How to Make War on Patent Trolls" -- an informative, thoughtful article, listing resources the government already has to defeat trolls but isn't much using, though it describes how Vermont is acting in at least one case. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/06/how-to-make-war-on-patent-trolls.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/06/how-t... From the article: "It is time to declare total war on patent trolls. The federal government, and the states, should do everything they can to exterminate them and to make anyone regret getting into such crooked work. The existence of trolls is entirely a product of government: they abuse a government program (the patent law), and continue to exist only thanks to government inaction." It later continues... "The one exception to the pattern of government inaction is Bill Sorrell, the Attorney General of Vermont, who, two weeks ago, filed lawsuits against MPHJ for exploiting Vermont businesses and nonprofits. He explained to me that Vermont is trying to attract new businesses to the state, and that scaring off trolls might help. “This is not anti-patent,” Sorrell said. “This is anti-abuse of patent rights. We don’t want people preying on Vermont’s small business.” The Vermont story may help create a race to the top. If Vermont succeeds in scaring trolls away, it will give companies there an advantage. And as more states act, it will be relatively worse to do business in those that don’t." It covers more than just Vermont and links to other informative resources. On another note... A major problem infrequently mentioned is that a lot of people, especially in parts of business far from R&D, see patents solely as a way to recoup private investment, not supposed to be balanced with public interest after limited times, and they use number of patents as a proxy for amount of innovation. They honestly see the system as it is now as functioning great. Many see objections to patents as objections to capitalism and business. Many of these people aren't stupid, malevolent, or self-serving. They believe in a model that no longer functions, but haven't realized that model no longer applies.

rayiner 13y ago
> A major problem infrequently mentioned is that a lot of people, especially in parts of business far from R&D, see patents solely as a way to recoup private investment, not supposed to be balanced with public interest after limited times, and they use number of patents as a proxy for amount of innovation. Lots of people in R&D see things this way. My friends in "Big Engineering" are proud of the number of patents they have to their name.

georgebonnr 13y ago

this.