3 ms·

So does this make it so if the intermittent wiper blade inventor Kearns[1] had lost due to having cheaper lawyers versus the millions that the auto companies ca

• sehugg 13y ago
  Not if Kearns was substantially justified in bringing a suit under the Equal Access to Justice Act, which would be hard to deny based on his having demonstrated the invention to Ford. Kearns could have still taken the $18 million awarded to him without additional risk. (His son could maybe not nowadays get away with putting his .45 automatic on the desk during negotiations, though) What the bill would do is prevent Kearns from selling his invention to a shell company with Chrysler as parent and suing Ford drivers for using the intermittent-wiper invention, since Ford would now be able to act on behalf of the defendants in these cases, and Chrysler would be liable for paying fees if they had acted in bad faith.
• AnthonyMouse 13y ago
  Can we please discontinue the practice of setting policy based on anecdotes? Answer this question: What percentage of recent patent plaintiffs are the named inventors on the patents and what percentage are either non-practicing entities with a lawyer majority of employees or large corporations?