16 ms·
> I wondered why patents are no concern for a competitor of Google (they have various broad and trivial patents on using historical data, user feedback, moderat
by w1ntermute 13y ago
> I wondered why patents are no concern for a competitor of Google (they have various broad and trivial patents on using historical data, user feedback, moderation for better search results).
How exactly are server-side patents enforced? When the hardware on which the infringement is occurring isn't exposed to the public, how can anyone verify its presence? I know that for some (many?) of Google's search patents, there might be an indication on the client side if infringement were occurring, but I imagine that there are also many patents for which this isn't the case.
- throwawaykf03 13y agoYou don't need convincing proof, just reasonable suspicion to file a lawsuit. (There's something called Rule 11 to discourage frivolous lawsuits, but it's a pretty low bar.) You can then determine actual infringement during discovery. This has some problems however: 1) As you can imagine discovery may not turn up any actual infringement, making it all a huge, expensive waste of time. 2) The unfortunate reality of patent lawsuits is that if you can't prove infringement just by looking at something, you might as well have already lost. Anything that requires expert witnesses to provide input on often comes down to which sides' witness the jury finds more likable, and that's pretty much a roll of the dice.
- w1ntermute 13y agoCouldn't "discovery" be abused to get a peek inside other companies' systems?