Yep.Apple appealed an existing, already issued patent in parallel to the lawsuit process.
Yep.Apple appealed an existing, already issued patent in parallel to the lawsuit process.
The companies I named fit that definition exactly. They 1. Purchased a patent portfolio. 2. Formed a holding company together and called it Rockstar Consortium. 3. Immediately started doing what patent trolls do - started suing other companies. So yeah, patent trolls.A patent troll is a company that holds patents for no other reason than squeezing money out of it with no intention at all to monetize the patents in any products or services. The companies you name don't fit the definition.
I think I'd be in favor of throwing out patents entirely.
I don't see any reason for them to exist.
They supposedly exist to protect inventors... but from what?
If patents didn't exist:
I put a lot of effort into R&D. Bring my product to market. I'm now the only person selling my product for a period of time.
You want to duplicate my product. You buy it. You invest in reverse engineering. You can now also sell the product.
How is the original person who invested in R&D harmed? They still made their initial profits. Their future profits might decline... but so what? Can't rest on your laurels. Consumers benefit because they have more choice.
If patents worked perfectly:
I put a lot of effort into R&D. Bring my product to market. Charge insane prices because I have a monopoly.
The way patents actually work right now:
Starts the same way as if they didn't exist. But wait, a patent troll exists! The person who invested in the R&D gets a BS lawsuit!
Patents make no freaking sense. If they worked perfectly, it would be terrible for consumers. If they didn't exist at all, it would be ideal for consumers. As is, they're terrible for everything but patent trolls and lawyers... consumers and inventors both suffer in the current system.
The companies I named fit that definition exactly. They 1. Purchased a patent portfolio. 2. Formed a holding company together and called it Rockstar Consortium. 3. Immediately started doing what patent trolls do - started suing other companies. So yeah, patent trolls.
Not only were they patent trolls, they turned the dial to 11 as vindictive patent trolls. They went out as sued Asustek, Google, HTC, Huawei, LG, Pantech, Samsung, and ZTE. They figuratively sued everyone from A-Z that had anything to do with Android.
Fortunately for everyone, calmer heads prevailed and those companies dissolved Rockstar and sold the assets to RPX.
I didn't call them patently trolls in jest or as a slight against any of them. That's what the were.
Rockstar was the patent troll. Apple and the others dissolved the company because they knew what they were doing was fundamentally wrong.So, Rockstar is the patent troll.
The problem with that argument is it can be one day between you selling your product and the copy being produced. You need to seen in order to make back the money you had to spend to make the idea work. The copycat only has to do that for the little amount they needed to spend to copy your idea. Final outcome of your idea, the original inventor makes no money and goes out of business, the copycat makes a shed load of money for very little effort. Massive failure.I think I'd be in favor of throwing out patents entirely.
I don't see any reason for them to exist.
They supposedly exist to protect inventors... but from what?
If patents didn't exist:
I put a lot of effort into R&D. Bring my product to market. I'm now the only person selling my product for a period of time.
You want to duplicate my product. You buy it. You invest in reverse engineering. You can now also sell the product.
Can we ban suing? Let them duke it out in the ally. I think apple should worry about wifi technology from cal tech lol.
I think I'd be in favor of throwing out patents entirely.
I don't see any reason for them to exist.
They supposedly exist to protect inventors... but from what?
If patents didn't exist:
I put a lot of effort into R&D. Bring my product to market. I'm now the only person selling my product for a period of time.
You want to duplicate my product. You buy it. You invest in reverse engineering. You can now also sell the product.
How is the original person who invested in R&D harmed? They still made their initial profits. Their future profits might decline... but so what? Can't rest on your laurels. Consumers benefit because they have more choice.
If patents worked perfectly:
I put a lot of effort into R&D. Bring my product to market. Charge insane prices because I have a monopoly.
The way patents actually work right now:
Starts the same way as if they didn't exist. But wait, a patent troll exists! The person who invested in the R&D gets a BS lawsuit!
Patents make no freaking sense. If they worked perfectly, it would be terrible for consumers. If they didn't exist at all, it would be ideal for consumers. As is, they're terrible for everything but patent trolls and lawyers... consumers and inventors both suffer in the current system.
Theres a reason the world doesn't work like this. Why on earth would a company spend years, sometimes decades researching a drug or cutting edge product, pumping billions into it, to get a few months sales before everyone else just copies it. It simply wouldn't work and no one would innovate, they would just sit back and wait for someone else to do the hard work and nothing would move forward.