5 ms·

Newegg on trial: Mystery company TQP rewrites the history of encryption

119 points by joeyespo 13y ago

dec0dedab0de 13y ago
FYI this links to page 2
- 2bluesc 13y ago
  Ain't nobody got time for page 1.
  - Pxtl 13y ago
    Wadsworth constant in print form.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
shmageggy 13y ago
This article was written a week and a half ago, before last week's decision. Here's the latest: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infringes-spangenberg-patent-must-pay-2-3-million/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infri... edit: Link to discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6799381 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6799381
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
cromwellian 13y ago
A guy admits he invents nothing, brazenly sues people before even attempting to sell a license, is challenged by the inventors of the cryptosystems in question, is shown evidence of prior art by the inventor of RC4, and wins the case. Can it get any more disgusting? I don't want to blame all lawyers, since I may one day need one fighting for me, but this guy is a real douchebag. Sugar coat it all you want "playing the game within the rules of the system". One can play honorably, or one can play dirty, and this guy is a dirt bag.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- mey 13y ago
  Actually in this particular case it seems to be an issue with the concept of jury by peers. Based on this article: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infringes-spangenberg-patent-must-pay-2-3-million/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infri... From further down this conversation
- msandford 13y ago
  Sadly truth means nothing in the courtroom. Only what you can convince people of. Had Diffie been a bit more more upfront in his testimony at the start, the troll's lawyers would have had no ability to impugn his credentials and get the judgement for infringement. It really sucks that all juries are pulled from the same wide pool, especially when the case is so incredibly esoteric. A murder or a drug case? Sure let anybody be a juror. But deciding some highly technical stuff? Probably ought to at least have an engineering-ish degree.
- Natsu 13y ago
  The more I read about patents, the more I think we should have "I thought of that first" rights, whereby people who thought about patenting something before the person who patented it could get their fair share of any licensing revenue derived from the patent. This would protect the small inventors from the big lawyers who dominate the patent scene I know some might deride that idea as rewarding people who contributed very little, but let's not forget: thinking it up is the hard part. After all someone who doesn't know as much about gaming theory as this guy wouldn't know what to do with a pseudo-random if they had one. And actually making things is mere grunt work, hardly befitting someone as important as an inventor. ~
  - simonw 13y ago
    "I thought of that first" in XKCD: http://xkcd.com/827/ http://xkcd.com/827/
arbuge 13y ago
The part below is pretty terrible. So all these big guys with the resources to fight back like Newegg did instead keeled over and paid up... "Target had a website; Target got sued by TQP. It got out of the case by paying $40,000. Some paid less than that—but most paid more. Dodge & Cox, a mutual fund, paid a bit more than $25,000. Pentagon Credit Union paid $65,000. QVC paid $75,000. MLB Advanced Media paid $85,000. PetSmart paid $150,000. PMC paid $400,000. Cigna paid $425,000. Bank of America paid $450,000. First National paid $450,000. Visa paid $500,000. Amazon, Newegg's much larger competitor, paid $500,000. UPS paid $525,000. IBM paid $750,000. Allianz Insurance paid $950,000. Microsoft paid $1,000,000."
- judk 13y ago
  To be clear, the payoffs from those companies financed the battle against newegg.
- bsaul 13y ago
  I had the same feeling of disgust by reading at those numbers, but then, remember that those big companies probably also own a lot of bogus patent themselves. Their IP department probably have no interest in advising "don't pay for those patents, they are bogus". That would shooting themselves in their foot.
desireco42 13y ago
We need all to stand behind Newegg here, if we let these people entangle us in their schemes, we will never be free. Newegg is fighting a good fight here and we need to make this more public.

119 points by joeyespo 13y ago

dec0dedab0de 13y ago

FYI this links to page 2

2bluesc 13y ago
Ain't nobody got time for page 1.
- Pxtl 13y ago
  Wadsworth constant in print form.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

shmageggy 13y ago

This article was written a week and a half ago, before last week's decision. Here's the latest: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infringes-spangenberg-patent-must-pay-2-3-million/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infri... edit: Link to discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6799381 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6799381

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

cromwellian 13y ago

A guy admits he invents nothing, brazenly sues people before even attempting to sell a license, is challenged by the inventors of the cryptosystems in question, is shown evidence of prior art by the inventor of RC4, and wins the case. Can it get any more disgusting? I don't want to blame all lawyers, since I may one day need one fighting for me, but this guy is a real douchebag. Sugar coat it all you want "playing the game within the rules of the system". One can play honorably, or one can play dirty, and this guy is a dirt bag.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
mey 13y ago
Actually in this particular case it seems to be an issue with the concept of jury by peers. Based on this article: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infringes-spangenberg-patent-must-pay-2-3-million/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/jury-newegg-infri... From further down this conversation
msandford 13y ago
Sadly truth means nothing in the courtroom. Only what you can convince people of. Had Diffie been a bit more more upfront in his testimony at the start, the troll's lawyers would have had no ability to impugn his credentials and get the judgement for infringement. It really sucks that all juries are pulled from the same wide pool, especially when the case is so incredibly esoteric. A murder or a drug case? Sure let anybody be a juror. But deciding some highly technical stuff? Probably ought to at least have an engineering-ish degree.
Natsu 13y ago
The more I read about patents, the more I think we should have "I thought of that first" rights, whereby people who thought about patenting something before the person who patented it could get their fair share of any licensing revenue derived from the patent. This would protect the small inventors from the big lawyers who dominate the patent scene I know some might deride that idea as rewarding people who contributed very little, but let's not forget: thinking it up is the hard part. After all someone who doesn't know as much about gaming theory as this guy wouldn't know what to do with a pseudo-random if they had one. And actually making things is mere grunt work, hardly befitting someone as important as an inventor. ~
- simonw 13y ago
  "I thought of that first" in XKCD: http://xkcd.com/827/ http://xkcd.com/827/

arbuge 13y ago

The part below is pretty terrible. So all these big guys with the resources to fight back like Newegg did instead keeled over and paid up... "Target had a website; Target got sued by TQP. It got out of the case by paying $40,000. Some paid less than that—but most paid more. Dodge & Cox, a mutual fund, paid a bit more than $25,000. Pentagon Credit Union paid $65,000. QVC paid $75,000. MLB Advanced Media paid $85,000. PetSmart paid $150,000. PMC paid $400,000. Cigna paid $425,000. Bank of America paid $450,000. First National paid $450,000. Visa paid $500,000. Amazon, Newegg's much larger competitor, paid $500,000. UPS paid $525,000. IBM paid $750,000. Allianz Insurance paid $950,000. Microsoft paid $1,000,000."

judk 13y ago
To be clear, the payoffs from those companies financed the battle against newegg.
bsaul 13y ago
I had the same feeling of disgust by reading at those numbers, but then, remember that those big companies probably also own a lot of bogus patent themselves. Their IP department probably have no interest in advising "don't pay for those patents, they are bogus". That would shooting themselves in their foot.

desireco42 13y ago

We need all to stand behind Newegg here, if we let these people entangle us in their schemes, we will never be free. Newegg is fighting a good fight here and we need to make this more public.