Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eatfgXTMFf0

by egb • 10 years ago

1565 399 10 years ago

clavalle5• 10 years ago

People will mention the problem with patents but I see another, perhaps bigger, problem:

We do not have equal access to our judicial system in the United States.

If you have money, you have the power to legally hold people with less over a barrel. That exploitable inequality is poison for a well functioning society. That is the problem that needs solving.

distances5• 10 years ago

"Loser pays" would go a long way, I think. Not being that familiar with the US system, what's the reasoning not to have this?

NTripleOne• 10 years ago

Some people would make a lot less money.

teej• 10 years ago

It's called the English Rule. People argue that implementing it could disincentivize people bringing forth valid cases and that it could lower the liklihood of settling, increasing legal and court costs for cases that do go through.

I don't really have an opinion either way, those are just the common arguments against it.

saint_fiasco• 10 years ago

If loser pays, poor people would be discouraged from even attempting to sue rich people.

Even if the poor person has a legitimate claim, there is a small probability that the rich person will win with their superior lawyers and the poor person will be bankrupted by the legal fees. Since they will know that from the beginning, they won't sue in the first place.

macspoofing• 10 years ago

It deincentives those who don't have deep pockets from asserting their rights through the judicial system.

c3534l• 10 years ago

You have that in some cases. My parents just went through that. A complete nonsense legal case (the other person stole tens of thousands of dollars in property and then sued them for demanding it back and spreading lies that the property was stolen from them). In the end, the judge ruled my parents were absolutely in the right and demanded court costs be paid for. Except, you know, that person didn't have any money and a nasty, multi-year long lawsuit is emotionally and financially devastating. There are also "anti-slap" laws sometimes where you can demand court costs paid for if the other person was suing you to try to suppress your freedom of speech. I'm sure that something could be done legally to curtail this atrocious behavior, but as the guy in the video mentioned, congress seems unwilling to take up the subject.

clavalle5• 10 years ago

The one major pitfall of 'loser pays' is that it creates greater risk for legitimate complainants that might still lose. It is less direct but still favors entities that can absorb that risk. Even so, I think you are right and it could be helpful especially if there is some 'legitimacy threshold' that must be crossed before it is invoked to keep the actual cases that need to be heard and judged by legal experts to be teased apart fairly from being quashed prematurely.

mikeash5• 10 years ago

Loser pays means that when an ridiculous East Texas judge and jury decide that a patent troll's claim is justified, the victim will not only have to pay damages and their lawyers, but the troll's lawyers too.

ogreveins• 10 years ago

As long as it's no more than the price of the cheaper legal team this method would work. That way poorer people who have been wronged are not heavily deterred from filing suit.

DocG• 10 years ago

Also, depositing 10% of the sued ammount would clean the place right up and bring ammouts to a more reasonable level. If I am correct, this is how it works in my country.

cinquemb• 10 years ago

But in all honesty, I do not see things changing anytime soon with regards to what you mention as being a bigger problem in the US (that I've personally experienced when going up against facebook without trying to spend a fortune in civil court).

I do see people taking advantage of legal systems in other countries in order to do other behaviors and applying a legal arbitrage of sorts agaisnt another legal system (i.e scihub/libgen vs elsevier), so maybe this will become more prevalent as time goes on as the technical means to do so becomes more available.

rhino3693• 10 years ago

It's actually the opposite. These patents trolls are typically very small operations suing massive corporations. They aren't rich guys screwing the little guy. It's the little guy screwing whoever he can.

These little guys have too much access to the legal system.

That's why it's hard to clamp down on. Nobody wants to make it so only big guys can have access to the legal system.

HillaryBriss3• 10 years ago

With the added wrinkle in this particular case that the patent troll is also suing a bunch of little guys who decided to use Google Play Store.

tanker• 10 years ago

You identified a separate problem from the parent post rather than refuting it.

#1: Big corporations can push small guys out of business by tying up their products in patent disputes.

#2: Patent trolls can bleed corporations big and small while producing nothing of value.

These problems are specific to the patent industry.

Are there similar problems in other areas of the law? If so, we may be able to identify and try to solve the larger problem. If not, we just need to focus on patent reform which is an easier problem.

spriggan3• 10 years ago

They aren't rich guys screwing the little guy. It's the little guy screwing whoever he can.

They are rich enough to sue. They are not "the little guy", they are often well funded businesses that buy patents wholesale for the sole purpose of suing other businesses.

maxxxxx• 10 years ago

They have enough money to keep a lawsuit going. They are certainly not "little guys" in the same sense a regular worker is.

thegasman6• 10 years ago

We do not have equal access to our judicial system in the United States.

I agree, but I think we can be more specific.

Criminals (or those accused of a crime) are constitutionally guaranteed an attorney. Civil plaintiffs/defendants, by contrast, have no such right. The anecdotes and experiences of HN users overwhelmingly describe the civil side of things.

Civil lawsuits, IMO, should carry no guarantee of counsel at the constitutional level. Imagine if they did: free lawyers mean frivolous lawsuits and over-burdened courts. But, I don't think anyone is actually clamoring for such an arrangement.

So, specifically, how can we more efficiently allocate limited legal resources to ensure that the average civil litigant is not disadvantaged by a wealth disparity with his opponent?

Well, what's the perceived disadvantage to a resource-poor litigant? What's the perceived advantage to a resource-rich litigant? Good facts make good cases much more frequently than good lawyers make good cases.

stormbrew4• 10 years ago

An interesting thought experiment along the lines of resolving this inequality is making it so that sides can only fund their civil case through a fund that both sides contribute to but both sides get an equal share. This means in order to frivolously sue someone, you have to be willing to fund their effort to defend against you.

It probably breaks down a lot in cases involving multiple litigants (let alone class actions), but it is an interesting idea.

bcruddy3• 10 years ago

What about a right to a defense attorney in a civil case? That way you can't bring frivolous suits. That's actually exactly how the criminal courts work too. This seems too simple of a solution though, are there good reasons not to do this?

djrogers3• 10 years ago

Good facts make good cases much more frequently than good lawyers make good cases.

Demonstrably not in the case of patent lawsuits, especially in east texas.

CyberDildonics• 10 years ago

Maybe the cost a lawsuit should include a public defender style attorney for the defendant?

sheepleherd7• 10 years ago

| We do not have equal access to our judicial system in the United States. If you have money, you have the power...

Your POV that money distorts and helps determine winners, while seeming so prima facie obvious, does not come close to getting to the real problem. I know this because I have money and I've spent well over a million dollars on attorneys in the last decade and I got very little in the way of ... not justice, very little in the way of consideration of the core legal questions in each case; in fact, I don't even know how the interesting core legal questions would have been resolved, the courts completely dodged them; and along the way, I saw a vast amount of phony posturing, amplification of minor details, and outright lying and manipulation of the legal system, mostly by attorneys; and the judges eat it up, because they too are attorneys. (and BTW, when a judge sees an unsophisticated indigent defendant, they actually do bend over backward to help them, say a confused tenant who does not pay rent is most usually given many many more chances.)

To put it into the context of this guy's patent rant: my point would be, there is a question as to whether this patent is valid or not, and whether it covers this particular issue or not. The "right/just" answer would be found more quickly and more cheaply and more rationally if the judge would simply decide that first in a non-binding way, like "from what I know so far, here's the way this is tilted". Then after that, if the losers wanted to spend money to present a stronger case they could, and the judge could say "warmer...warmer... colder". Then after all that, if you want to try to change the thing on a technicality like "yeah but you didn't serve the notice the right way", then the court would hear that.

The way courts decide things is to completely front-load all these arcane minor points, and it has the effect of squeezing the shit out of the litigants to force them to settle. "You think you have a legal dispute that's worth this much? I'll give you dispute resolution that costs more and much of your life. Now do you want to settle? Don't test me, as a judge I'm a former attorney, we win at this game. Now do you want to settle?"

clavalle5• 10 years ago

You are right. Having money equips someone to at least be able to put up a fight to reach a conclusion but that is not the heart of the issue.

Whether you have money or not the real problem is the threat of loss due to the /process/ as opposed the merits and likely result of the case. That is the problem that needs to be solved.

I'm not saying I know how to remove the expense of the process out of the equation but that is what needs to be done.

Your suggestion is a good one. If the result itself is clearer earlier it would take some of the power out of the threat of expensive process.

js4713• 10 years ago

I would love to see more negative publicity used. A PR firm is a fraction of the cost of a law firm but can do a lot more damage to the other side. Unfortunately lawyers have this dogma that says never ever ever ever ever try to use negative publicity. This is obviously self serving. Most lawyers are clueless about social media post AOL and so this would take the battle into unfamiliar territory. Unfortunately the judges are in the same boat: Taking a legal matter to court of public opinion is to them like taking getting your gall bladder removed by a witch doctor.

orbitingpluto2• 10 years ago

Nothing astounds me more than the Herculean lengths a judge will go to to avoid the 'core legal questions' in a case. Not only in the judgement, but by disallowing even the most basic testimony or evidence to be presented. While this violates due process or 'the principle of natural justice', no judge on appeal ever seems to rule that the lower court judge was acting in an obviously corrupt manner. The fiction of the system of justice has to be preserved.

This is further compounded by how vague judges will be in their decisions in some attempt to prevent a successful appeal. The judgements relation to the facts are so intentionally obtuse.

pdabbadabba8• 10 years ago

I'm one of those hated attorneys. And, in my experience, while there are issues that sometimes may seem to outsiders like pointless minutae that keep people from getting at the real issues, the rules of civil procedure (especially at the federal level) are designed to do exactly what you want: to facilitate getting to the core of the issue as fast as possible (of course, if the core of the issue is a factual question, this can take a while due to pesky things like discovery and jury trials). Without more detail, the problems you describe sound, with respect, like the complaints of someone who does not really understand how litigation works. Maybe if you could put a little meat on the bones I (and we) could understand your criticisms of the system a little better.

In this example, as you say, "there is a question as to whether this patent is valid or not, and whether it covers this particular issue or not." If the defendant thinks those are real issues, then one of the first things the rules would have you do is to file a motion to dismiss arguing exactly those points. If the judge agrees with you, the case is over and you go home. (Of course, there is the possibility that there are other claims that aren't subject to those arguments, or that the plaintiff could amend the complaint to add new legal theories, but that's another story.)

To the extent it is true that courts "completely front-load all these arcane minor points" this is usually true only to the extent that these arcane issues are actually dispositive.

EDIT: Try thinking about it this way: whether an issue is arcane, and not what a person might think is the "real" core of the issue, is sometimes orthogonal to whether that issue is dispositive. And there are usually good reasons for this--though reasons that may not be obvious to non-lawyers. This can, and should, result in courts spending what may seem to the untrained eye like too much time on arcane but dispositive issues in an attempt to resolve a case efficiently.

steven2012• 10 years ago

The other side of that coin is that if you don't have a lot of money then you most likely won't get sued.

js4713• 10 years ago

I complained about a corporation that was breaking the law in an online forum. They sued me for defamation, saying flatly that they had no dealings whatsoever in the accused activity. Shortly after they sued someone else in the same state claiming that, in the process of the same illegal activity, which they described in detail, some other party was not acting in good faith. I ask my lawyer "how in America in 2016 can they make two blatantly contradictory lawsuits?" The lawyer told me "This is a pissing contest you don't want to be involved in. You should settle ASAP". So I paid my life savings and tried to move on.

dragontamer• 10 years ago

Or maybe its just a problem with the East Texas court. Almost all bad patent issues resolve from this court. A ton of them are appealed successfully.

It doesn't matter how fairly the laws are written if the judges presiding over them are assholes.

JakeWesorick• 10 years ago

Really seems like Google/Apple should make some kind of statement calling out how ridiculous these lawsuits are.

Flott• 10 years ago

Could Google do more then a statement? It can't be good for their business if people are being sued for simply uploading an app to the Play Store.

djrogers3• 10 years ago

When developers were sued by Lodsys Apple intervened with a motion due to the fact that the developers were covered under Apple's license. After 2 years, the judge refused to hear the motion and threw it out...

toss19412• 10 years ago

I agree, Google must step in here, pronto.

rplnt2• 10 years ago

Doesn't sound like Google. If it had affected Newegg on the other hand...

Grishnakh6• 10 years ago

What these tech giants need to do is collude, but this time instead of colluding to screw over their employees by not "poaching" them, they need to collude to cut off all their services to this district of East Texas. Screw over the morons living in this area whose economy lives off this leaching, and also make it so many patent lawsuits can be easily dismissed because the internet services these patents supposedly cover won't be available there, so they can argue the venue is inappropriate.

comboy• 10 years ago

Couldn't Google offer defense in such cases for its users? Every case is the same so it shouldn't even be that expensive (I guess, IANAL), and it would discourage future cases because the troll would know he will have to fight against Google.

oddevan• 10 years ago

I do feel like when a similar thing happened with the iOS App Store (app devs sued for using in-app purchases), Apple tried to insert itself into the case saying that all the technology used was theirs.

rhino3693• 10 years ago

Yea they could in multiple ways. They could sue to the troll for a declaratory judgement of invalidity and non infringement. Or they just indemnify their app stor developers for any patent liability caused by using their product.

ikeboy• 10 years ago

Or they just indemnify their app stor developers for any patent liability caused by using their product.

What about actual patent violations?

tommoor• 10 years ago

Good guy Google should definitely be stepping in here

droidist2• 10 years ago

I won't hold my breath

Shivetya• 10 years ago

I guess I am stupid, why isn't Google the defendant, other than the fact they have too much money. This is like being sued for shopping at the wrong store.

vermontdevil• 10 years ago

Because it's easier to make money going after small business knowing these business can't afford a lawsuit.

One of these troll companies made $30 million a year doing this and they are even listed on the stock exchange!!

developer22• 10 years ago

The problem is that the "patent" (fucking loose term of the word for something that should never have been allowed to be filed) is about the use of the code in question. It's not the App Store that is supposedly infringing, it's the use of the App Store. What a joke.

MichaelGG• 10 years ago

As I understand, patent liability doesn't stop at any point. So your customers can be sued for using your infringing ptoduct. This has the effect of letting patent owners choose who to go after.

tedmiston4• 10 years ago

He answers this in the FAQ at the end of the video: Because Google is big enough that it could defend itself.

derekp7• 10 years ago

Yes, that is part of the patent law. 35.271.a: ... whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention ... infringes the patent.

That is why that one copier patent troll (can't remember the specifics) files suit against businesses that purchase copier, but not the manufactures themselves.

rwhitman2• 10 years ago

Or at least they could join with some other companies to pool money towards a software trade association with real teeth that we can rely on to represent our industry's interests when it's under attack like this.

It's appalling how limp this business is when it comes to demonstrating political muscle

Claudus• 10 years ago

Judge Davis retired May 15, 2015

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Davis_(judge)

CameronBanga• 10 years ago

Thank God, all of this should be coming to an end any day now.

jules3• 10 years ago

It won't though. The supply of people willing to sell their soul to make easy money contains more than one person.

Pica_soO• 10 years ago

Son appointed judge, family clan as associates in law-firm... The world does not work this way.

jostmey• 10 years ago

And what has such a man accomplished at the end of his life?

mfisher87• 10 years ago

Probably made a ton of money by ruining people's lives.

tomglynch• 10 years ago

A comment from a reddit thread states: The gist behind this case is that the Judge's son owns patent law firm in East Texas where they often represent both sides. This guy doesn't live in East Texas. However, the dad lets these stupid cases into the town to bring business to his son. Really shady.

I agree with clavelle's comment. It's not so much the laws, but the system that allows this to occur.

Link here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/4n08jj/developer_i...

InvisibleCities• 10 years ago

The gist behind this case is that the Judge's son owns patent law firm in East Texas where they often represent both sides.

Isn't this a blatant conflict of interest? If this isn't grounds for disbarment, what is?

mfoy_2• 10 years ago

Maybe the firm doesn't represent both sides simultaneously. Maybe they usually represent the patent troll, but if someone needs a patent troll defense lawyer they'll do that too. Basically, as long as patent litigation is in town, business is good.

phaed• 10 years ago

Did you even watch the video? He says it right on there.

dang• 10 years ago

That's true, but please edit did-you-even-read challenges out of your posts to HN. That's in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

It's enough to just point out what the article/video says, like your second sentence does.

joe_the_user• 10 years ago

It's worse than that.

The situation is that with patent suits able to be brought anywhere and brought in East Texas by preference, a significant amount of that areas economy is now based on this racket and so the culture of the area is very oriented towards enable patent trolls, especially given a general contempt of outsiders characteristic of a small town.

In the pre-Internet era, one needed to take an unlucky to get murdered or shaken down by the corrupt culture of Smokey And The Bandit style US small towns. The ambiguity of the law and the convenience of entrenched interests now means that

It's been going on for a long time. Recent article: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/How-east-Tex...

2006 article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/business/24ward.html?pagew...

Choice quote: "'During the TiVo-EchoStar trial, 90 percent of my revenue for one month came from one of the law firms in the case,' said Phillip W. Gurganus, manager of the local 68-room Hampton Inn, where rates run $77 a night." Guess what he'd chose if got on a jury? Certainly a decision that kept business in East Texas.

Zelmor• 10 years ago

It's in the US and I find it hard to believe that noone has so far shot these kind of scammers. Aim right, citizen! For the greater good!

julianwachholz• 10 years ago

Harry Brown lives in the U.K. unfortunately.

SZJX4• 10 years ago

I think that's the typical US for you.

jhayward4• 10 years ago

According to the wikipedia page for the Eastern District of Texas both of the judges he names are retired from the court, one in 2011 and one in 2015. How does he claim in 2016 that these judges are presiding on his case and cases like it?

angry-hacker3• 10 years ago

Well, he did say it has been going on for many many years.

int_19h• 10 years ago

He got sued in 2012, and it's still going.

MaysonL• 10 years ago

Perhaps they are on senior status: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_status

kazinator• 10 years ago

It is more than shady; it looks like glaringly unethical behavior. The nepotism and conflict of interest are completely clear.

notyourwork• 10 years ago

This guy doesn't live in East Texas. However, the dad lets these stupid cases into the town to bring business to his son. Really shady.

How is this not legally considered a conflict of interest in cases where the judge had relation to one side of the case? I don't know much about the law system but I would assume their are provisions in place to prevent these types of conflicts.

dingo_bat2• 10 years ago

Someone with money and lawyers needs to sue the state of Texas for allowing a father and son duo to practice in such a conflict of interest fashion. This is a clear cut case of corruption.

HillaryBriss3• 10 years ago

Isn't this the federal court system? Not sure: is Texas even able to do anything about this?

djrogers3• 10 years ago

I'm not sure where exactly this assertion stands - Judge Davis retires last year, and in 2011 when Lodsys was represented by his son's firm, their cases were always assigned to the other district judge (Gilsap I believe?) due to the conflict of interest.

It's sensational and scummy sounding, so it really fits the narrative of the evil patent trolls (a narrative I wholeheartedly support), I don't see any reason to believe it's true.

dingo_bat2• 10 years ago

Ah! I didn't know that! I was going on what the guy in the video said.

DannyBee2• 10 years ago

I'm not even sure where to begin with this :) First, you can't sue a state without their permission, they have sovereign immunity. Second, you would have no standing unless you were directly affected Third, outside of violating non-binding legal ethics rules, it's not clear what law you think this somehow violates.

The state can pretty much do whatever it wants here.

Plus, all of this is federal anyway, so suing the state of texas would accomplish nothing.

Outside of random statutes, your best bet would probably be due process violations, but ...

MichaelBurge• 10 years ago

A lawsuit might not be appropriate, but there is a separate 'right to petition the government' for that.

sangnoir• 10 years ago

States' rights, Fuck yeah!

mobilefriendly3• 10 years ago

Correct, this situation is 100% a creature of Congress and several Administrations, the actual state of Texas has nothing to do with it.

narrator• 10 years ago

Suing the state to stop patent lawsuits is not going to work. Hiring an army of lobbyists and giving campaign donations liberally might work though.

tripzilch3• 10 years ago

You're suggesting to use one systemic corruption to fight the other! That might solve the one problem in the short term (maybe), but legitimizing that sort of strategy for affecting change just means that in the end the most corruptest one with the biggest army of lobbyists and campaign donations is going to call the shots. Hey it's your country, but maybe just think about that for a second.

jiiam• 10 years ago

It's good to raise awareness, especially on the users of the play store (I mean, the developers).

For example I learned a lot from this video: in case I decided to sell an app on any store, I'd better contact my lawyer to get advised on where and how to incorporate my company.

I don't know if it can be easily resolved by incorporating in another country, but the difficulties of an international litigation should discourage trolls.

djsumdog2• 10 years ago

New Zealand. They banned software patents.

mobilefriendly3• 10 years ago

There's broad exclusion for software in Europe as well.

curiousgal2• 10 years ago

I'm no advocate of violence but this makes you wonder about the ethics of beating such guys up. The legal system seems pointless.

davesque• 10 years ago

You're wondering about the ethics of beating someone up to get what you want?

tim3332• 10 years ago

It might make the world a better place overall but likely cause problems for the beater.

CamperBob23• 10 years ago

My view is admittedly a bit on the extreme side (to put it mildly) but I'd see it as similar to hunting Somali pirates or Congolese poachers for sport. There are things a human can do to set themselves apart from the rest of humanity, and patent trolling is one of them.

Patent trolls don't rise (sink) to the level of child molesters, serial killers or ISIS terrorists, but still... I wouldn't shed any tears if something really bad happened to these people, whether by accident or design. They attack the best of us while contributing nothing. We don't need them.

Grishnakh6• 10 years ago

I hate to point it out, but history is littered with examples of cases where following the law and using non-violent diplomatic approaches failed, necessitating the use of violence (in the eyes of those who felt they had no recourse). It's the very reason just about every nation has a military, for instance.

In a nutshell, if you think beating someone up to get what you want is wrong, then you must necessarily think that military force is wrong, and maintaining a military force is also wrong.

You can also look at some pretty extreme examples: if you're a Jew in 1930-something Germany or one of the nations it occupied, and a bunch of soldiers are coming to take you to the camps, is it unethical for you to use violence against them? Of course, you might argue that's a bad example because the other side already initiated the use of (or threat of; they're carrying guns) violence so you had the right of self-defense. But that's no different than having a legal system that you feel is unjust: if you don't agree with the legal system's ruling and resist or ignore it, then they'll send men with guns to force you into submission using violence.

Now you can argue that there's a huge difference in magnitude between being taken to death camps and losing a patent case and having to give a large sum of money to a patent troll, but I think the principle is the same, it's just a difference in degree. All human conflict is like this: we have systems we try to use to avoid solving our differences with violence, but at times, these systems fail and at least one party feels the price/risk is worth it. Luckily, if you look at the entirety of human history, the amount of violence has been steadily falling, and we're probably at the least violent point in history, if you look at humanity as a whole.

6stringmerc3• 10 years ago

So, no attempts to bring Davis in front of the Texas BAR association for unethical practices?

I'm also curious why numerous developers have not demanded an Insurance Protection Product / Plan that would take a premium in return for subrogation (defense) if a frivolous Patent Suit is filed. I'm rather certain the market exists and while it may be for larger businesses or players, developers forming a Mutual Company and writing on some big name AM Best A paper (or even going to Lloyds) could be helpful.

Anybody know of such an organization or idea?

I guess my line of thinking here is that "Yes, this is totally unfair and rigged" and then move on to "How do I work around the issues, at least to a limited extent, to avoid these pitfalls?" Sign me up for reform, sure, I'm all for it. Until then, I don't like banging my head against walls, I prefer to figure out ways around or over them.

forgotpwtomain• 10 years ago

I'm also curious why numerous developers have not demanded an Insurance Protection Product / Plan that would take a premium in return for subrogation (defense) if a frivolous Patent Suit is filed. I'm rather certain the market exists and while it may be for larger businesses or players, developers forming a Mutual Company and writing on some big name AM Best A paper (or even going to Lloyds) could be helpful.

It would be very cool if company such as NewEgg could offer this - they already have the in-house counsel/expertise; and since the number of people trolled is very small, I'm sure even a small premium would be enough to cover it (provided you have enough customers).

ntaylor• 10 years ago

I'm also curious why numerous developers have not demanded an Insurance Protection Product / Plan that would take a premium in return for subrogation (defense) if a frivolous Patent Suit is filed. I'm rather certain the market exists and while it may be for larger businesses or players, developers forming a Mutual Company and writing on some big name AM Best A paper (or even going to Lloyds) could be helpful.

I suspect part of the problem is that the monetary and time costs of litigation could not be easily measured. Every case would be, effectively, unique. Not insurmountable, but I have to imagine that the premiums would need to be very high.

ThrustVectoring• 10 years ago

On aggregate, the jurisdiction that patent trolls sue in can handle only so many cases, so it only takes a legal team of a certain size to defend every patent lawsuit in it.

And as a bonus, you can generate a Newegg-like reputation to convince people that you're not worth bothering.

joshmn• 10 years ago

It exists. Kind of. I know there's a company called LegalShield, and I'm sure LegalZoom has its own version of it.

dikaiosune• 10 years ago

There are companies which offer litigation insurance (someone I know recently got some for a potential lawsuit). But AFAIK, they generally require you to present your case along with expert legal analysis to them before they'll even set a price for the insurance. Which goes back to one of the problems with patents -- there are so many of them which are bogus, how could you ever do a truly exhaustive review of potential infringement?

readams• 10 years ago

The insurance would cost more than the expected cost of the litigation which is of course how insurance works. They key with the patent system is that you have to pay millions to defend yourself, but it's exceptionally rare to be able to recover attorney's fees even if you win.

So in the end it's a choice between capitulating and paying some amount (and perhaps unleashing more trolls in the future) or wasting millions and many many hours of your time over years of your life defending yourself.

There's no way to win, which is why this is now a big industry.

LeifCarrotson• 10 years ago

The insurance would cost more than the expected cost of litigation for the average member. The vast majority of developers will never be sued, but you don't know if you will be among the unlucky few.

See medical malpractice insurance for another example.

peeters• 10 years ago

The insurance would cost more than the expected cost of the litigation which is of course how insurance works. The key with the patent system is that you have to pay millions to defend yourself, but it's exceptionally rare to be able to recover attorney's fees even if you win.

If enough people buy insurance to make sure that the patent trolls never win, then there's no money to be made and the lawyers stop suing. So the price of insurance goes down. It's not like insuring against tornados, which are going to happen regardless of whether the houses are insured. Furthermore, you can state up front "IP Lawsuit Coverage provided by XXX" as a disincentive for people to sue their members in the first place.

tedmiston4• 10 years ago

Perhaps there are ways to defer the lawsuits for lengthy periods of time? (I don't actually know.)

nickparker• 10 years ago

This is a bit of a simplistic view... Insurance trades a slightly higher expected cost for zero variance in cost.

For small companies, that's a great proposition because a small monthly fee can be planned for, while a patent suit is do or die find very expensive legal support.

comicjk• 10 years ago

Side note: "bar" as in bar association is not an acronym. It refers to the literal bar or barrier in courtrooms which divides participants from the public.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_(law)

300bps• 10 years ago

How would the insurance policy differentiate between patent trolling and legitimate patent abuses? Because I could foresee a company purchasing this insurance and then willy-nilly violating patents to their hearts content.

6stringmerc3• 10 years ago

Simple contract language. There's no compulsion for a legitimate Insurance Team to undewrite a fraudulent risk, and that language will be included in the contract/agreement. I do think it of akin to Auto Insurance Companies in the US being able to deny a claim if the Claimant was doing something against the policy, e.g. "You were street racing and therefore we are not covering your liability" is a seemingly proven out.

wongarsu• 10 years ago

The insurance company could cover legal costs, but only until they lost X of your cases (for small X).

junker101• 10 years ago

There are firms that offer patent infringement insurance services. The cost is astronomical (7 figures per year).

I have a fair amount of experience with patent trolls.

I've seen companies sued for using facebook, where the damages are X dollars times the number of facebook followers/posts/comments they have. (So the level of risk is very hard to estimate for an insurer, because interaction numbers on the internet can spike easily)

Also, the the troll will practically _always_ offers a settlement that is roughly equivalent (or a few percent cheaper) than the legal fees to defend and win the case. -So a company has two options: Spend Y dollars to make it go away; or Spend Y*0.99 dollars and a year of wasted time to _maybe_ win. The system is setup such that Patent Trolls can't lose and companies can't really win.

eonw• 10 years ago

i was the victim of a patent trolling company called acacia research. they sent me a bunch of legal threats but had my name spelled incorrectly, which happened to give away who had sold my info to them(in exchange for dropping the case a certain entity traded all of their affiliates info to acacia). i was 19 at the time and laughed it off. nothing ever came of it, but in hindsight it certainly wasn't a laughing matter. in the end i think someone staged a pretty good defense and crushed their patent.

tronium2• 10 years ago

Interestingly, the login button doesn't even work at uniloc.com, and if you look in the source, there's a ton of commented-out paragraphs that say stuff like "<h2>The spirit of innovation is alive and well at Uniloc.</h2>".

dylan-m• 10 years ago

Fun fact: their website has listings turned on and runs an ancient version of WordPress last touched in 2012.

http://www.uniloc.com/wp-content/

It's like they're trying to be as obviously illiterate as they possibly can.

ghurtado• 10 years ago

Including publicly accessible database backups. I haven't seen such disregard for security in a very long time.

For a "software security company" they sure are begging for their website to be hacked.

Or maybe it is a honeypot?

alexpetralia• 10 years ago

They also have port 21 open: https://www.shodan.io/host/108.166.176.214

aurizon• 10 years ago

The only way you can deal with trolls is to slay them. Attribution of costs does not work. Most trolls consist of lawyers who create paper work and file it. They do not hire outside law firms at $500+ per hour - the ones their victims are forced to hire. The only tru costs they have are the file fees, which East Texas keeps low. That town is totally a parasitic town and they award wins to trolls to keep the town in cash that trickles down.

I say slay the trolls, slay the judges, slay them all - by legal means if possible. I would love to find an old Texas law that allows trial by combat with no substitutions...

tronium2• 10 years ago

Question: Is a lot of the backend supposed to be available through going directly to the wp-content? If you go to uniloc.com/wp-content/, there's backups, images, plugins, and even a .sql file...

WhatIsThisIm12• 10 years ago

Hah nice. Probably not the kind of firm you want to be messing with, however...

Then again I'll just leave this here.

http://uniloc.com/wp-content/backup-9b7a1/uniloc_wpu_2012032...

joshbaptiste• 10 years ago

TLDW - Patent troll sues Xplane creator after he migrated his app to the Google play store. They claim they own the general idea of the Google play store. Law firms create these cases for billable hours for their lawyers and some of their parent judges in Texas. Patent trolls and law firms in the end want to receive a settlement by targeting app creators and not Google themselves who are well equipped to defend themselves, http://www.thepatentscam.com/ .

yrro2• 10 years ago

Wow, does this happen to many people who put their stuff on Google Play? What about the Apple App Store?

Seems like Google/Apple should step in and cover the costs of being sued by a patent troll for using their platform... if they don't want developers to be discouraged from using it.

Then again, particularly in Apple's case, it's not like the developers have much of a choice.

MrMullen• 10 years ago

Logically, how is this even possible? Xplane does not own Google Play Store and Xplane is not aware that Google is violating a patent then how is Xplane responsible for the patent violation? This strikes me a 15 minute conversation in front of a judge. "Sir, I did not know Google was violating a patent and I have withdrawn my application after being told so" and that should be the end of it.

namlem• 10 years ago

Because this particular judge refuses to throw out illegitimate patent cases because he's corrupt as fuck. He recently retired, but presumably someone else just filled his place.

joshuaheard2• 10 years ago

A couple of misconceptions in this video. Patent infringement is not a crime. A son lawyer appearing in front of his judge father would not be allowed for conflict of interest in most circumstances.

That being said, patent trolling is obviously a problem, and legislation to fix the problem is making its way through Congress.

knorker2• 10 years ago

1) Did he say crime? I don't think he ever did.

2) He never said the son appeared in front of his judge father. I'm almost 100% on that too.

So misconceptions in what you misheard, I guess.

bruceb• 10 years ago

He did say crime but not in a way that meant criminal justice crime. More of a "I am guilty of the crime of being beautiful"

addled• 10 years ago

Right. The son doesn't have to appear in front of his father to benefit from his father furthering east Texas's reputation of being patent-troll friendly.

joshuaheard2• 10 years ago

He said crime.

If the son is not appearing in front of the judge, then the judge's rulings don't benefit the son in any way. If you are arguing the judge's ruling is somehow affecting the reputation of the court and attracting cases, the lawyers know it is only that judge, unless you are implying some sort of conspiracy among the federal judges to be patent troll-friendly.

pascalxus2• 10 years ago

I say we all write to our congress members to help make this legislation pass. It may be naive of me to think such emails will have any impact at all, but it's all we can do, right?

corysama• 10 years ago

Here's a vid from the same guy last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbyW_QS8Ef8

He had just won a three year litigation with the same group, after which they pointed out that even though he had won a battle, they had enough BS patents to keep him in court for several lifetimes. He is currently in year 4 out of a projected 450.

0xfeba• 10 years ago

Jesus. I think a hitman is cheaper than the cost of all that.

barkingdog2• 10 years ago

A while back, I did some research into patent trolls, and came across the history of NPE firms that do DPA (defensive patent aggregation), like RPX [0]. What surprised me from a game theoretical perspective was how murky things got. These situations can be tough on entrepreneurs and seem to create space for said entrepreneur to purchase protection in the form of patent aggregation to mitigate against potential devastation caused by this. On one hand, I can see how it can amount to a protection racket. On the other hand, the existence of patents and how they relate to property are pretty complex. This TechCrunch article about RPX does a good job of going into further detail about this, but truth be told, I am even more on the fence after reading this. I agree that patent reform would be necessary to rectify this situation, but in the meantime, I can't think of a better alternative. The cynic inside me can't help but think that business is always it's own kind of war, sadly.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation [1] http://techcrunch.com/2008/11/24/is-rpxs-defensive-patent-ag...

buildbuildbuild• 10 years ago

Interesting, his case is in their search tool: https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/txedce-138585-uniloc-v-lamina...

barkingdog2• 10 years ago

From what I recall, they acquire IP when its from companies in this situation. I'm not a betting person, but I would not be surprised if this situation was a good opportunity for RPX's PR.

deepsun2• 10 years ago

I came from an European country, and the root cause seems pretty clear to me: why defending yourself in court is so damn expensive? In my country, you don't often need an attorney (although for complex cases you certainly do), but even if you do hire an attorney, they cost way, way less. Like $20,000 for a complex case, and it's going to be a team of lawyers.

Also, companies just don't sue each other that often. I don't know why US is different.

tripzilch3• 10 years ago

I'm reading this thread with a similar wonder: they seem to be blaming everything but the broken legal system.

Google should fix it, East-Texas should fix it, Texas should fix it, donation to legal funds should fix it, insurance should fix it, more campaigning and lobbying should fix it, we should let them fight to the death that will fix it!

Hmhm. Quite :)

JustSomeNobody• 10 years ago

How has East Texas not been shut down already?

Zikes2• 10 years ago

Everybody in the chain of responsibility capable of doing so stands to financially benefit from this practice continuing.

For a business to claim it's "based in" East Texas it'll have to pay its taxes there. Local litigation law firms are bringing tons of money into the area, further increasing local revenue. Shutting it down would probably even knock a significant slice off of the state's income.

josaka• 10 years ago

The patent in the video is US 6857067. Claims 1, 20, 22, 30, 31, 67, 107, and 108 were invalidated by the Patent Office in an administrative proceeding, but claims 21 and 22 survived that particular challenge. See IPR2013-00391, Final Decision. Cost for these challenges is around $300k (and often much less for troll suits), rather than the $2-5 million that is typically quoted for district court cases.

kukx• 10 years ago

What about making an "anti patent troll" website that will allow users to share their legal approaches and documents and the rest of the defense materials. Some of them may be reusable. I guess it should significantly limit the legal costs for everyone and improve their position against trolls, right?

tim3332• 10 years ago

I was toying with doing that. Even got a domain name. Might be a bit of a hassle though. Dunno. Thoughts anyone? Would it help? Would I get sued?

toss19412• 10 years ago

IANAL but I'd setup the corporate entity outside the US and hire a mail forwarding service of some kind to redirect all the mail to your home.

devrs02• 10 years ago

I'm not sure how this works when it comes to a successful defense but it's my understanding that, in the case of a settlement, the defendant must sign an NDA - preventing just this and allowing the racket to continue.

hansjorg• 10 years ago

Another video linked here featuring the same guy links to http://www.trollfighter.com/ which seems to be an initiative of something called Application Developers Alliance.

mholt• 10 years ago

"... defend myself for committing the crime of ..."

But a lawsuit is a civil case, not a criminal case, right?

dougmccune• 10 years ago

Is there a unified place one can donate to that people think is the best way to put some money toward real change in the system? I'm happy to send some money to the EFF, but I'd up that 100 times if I knew it was going 100% toward killing patent trolls and I thought it was the best organization to fight that fight.

mmaunder2• 10 years ago

Agreed. I'd love to see Austin set up a gofundme with specific goals, milestones, a well defined team and strategy. We'd contribute if it's something that would bring about real change.

vanderZwan• 10 years ago

This was linked in a description of one of the videos:

http://www.trollfighter.com/

finstell• 10 years ago

Uniloc has this piece of Google Maps screenshot hosted at their web server. Isn't this not allowed? http://www.uniloc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Screen-shot...

lintiness• 10 years ago

welcome to a political system (and indeed a world) run by lawyers.

treehau5• 10 years ago

And the 'democratic' party just 'nominated' a lawyer-at-heart as well, who has perfectly demonstrated that lawyeresque doublespeak can shield you from any blame or responsibility of actions that would have lesser plebeians dishonored, fired on the spot, jailed or any combination thereof.

I guess we must secretly love getting screwed over.

davemel372• 10 years ago

It's time to call in John Oliver...He's our last and only hope!

cloudjacker• 10 years ago

He's already done a video on this, the same guy was featured in it

hhsnopek3• 10 years ago

I find it oddly funny how Google hasn't stepped in to support their "clients", I'd think they'd help shutdown patent trolls so developers can continue to improve and distribute applications

optimiz3• 10 years ago

Seriously - what the fuck Google?

It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style.

daenz• 10 years ago

It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style.

Perhaps a competing troll owns the iteration patent.

petersellers• 10 years ago

That would almost assuredly force Google to get involved. I think it's more likely that they will continue to sue just a few small time developers here and there to try and keep things under the radar.

doktrin• 10 years ago

Absolutely. At least Apple pledged nominal, vocal support when their developers were being similarly threatened.

droopybuns• 10 years ago

Google offers pretty handcuffs that developers mistake for bracelets.

Consider how Google is helping the OEMs get Android updates out. Consider how easy it is to call google customer care.

The real question should be: what the fuck developers? Why do you keep hitching yourself to such an unreliable partner? When is it enough?

muddi900• 10 years ago

As the video mentions, people have been sued for App Store and Steam as well.

Google, and Apple and Valve, can send their own lawyers to defend these clients, but since there are dozens of cases, it will be quite expensive. They can maybe sue these trolls for tortous interference, but that may not stick.

So they can't do much.

Esau• 10 years ago

Agreed. They should fight this patent, especially since Be Inc. had an online app store back in 1999.

NEDM642• 10 years ago

The first AppStore was even older, it was made for NeXTSTEP, Steve Jobs bought the whole thing.

piyush_soni• 10 years ago

I would totally want this too, but legally, can Google do something here when they are not a party in this litigation?

hhsnopek3• 10 years ago

I believe the defendants are able to hire any lawyer. In that case Google would be able to provide support without issue. I could be wrong.

jrcii• 10 years ago

They could file an amicus brief with the court.

rayiner2• 10 years ago

Google could agree to indemnify app developers for legal fees. There are certain restrictions on other people paying for your legal defense but it's commonly done subject to those restrictions.

They could also take the first app developer to get sued under the patent and pay for them to file a CBM review. Or file an IPR or PGR in their own right seeking to invalidate the patent.

ubernostrum• 10 years ago

IIRC Apple has a history of stepping in to defend app developers from trolls. So there are at least some cases where it's possible.

caiowilsonb• 10 years ago

Honestly I just think 4chan should get involved in this. That would probably turn out awesome.

rplnt2• 10 years ago

Because Google has a great track record of caring about Android developers? They are basically monopoly (in western markets at least), they don't need to do anything to turn profit. They are happy to collect their 30% while spending almost nothing (directly that is - on support for example).

Thetawaves• 10 years ago

The Google Play Store didn't write it self.... Those developers cost real money.

cma• 10 years ago

He mentioned in the video that App Store apps were getting affected sometimes too, did Apple step in? (I'm legitimately asking, I thought I remembered something about them doing so, but it might have been in relation to a different patent thing unrelated to the store itself).

acomjean• 10 years ago

apples app developers were sued, apple tried to step in. The circumstances were a little different.

This is what I could find. I think the suits were dropped.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/08/apple-tells-judge-inter...

bunnymancer• 10 years ago

"We want all the freedom Apple doesn't offer!"

"Why are we forced to fight for ourselves?!"

Sure...

hhsnopek3• 10 years ago

This is a platform that millions use, this isn't a simple freedom that developers don't have for not using Apple's platform. If Google doesn't support their developers, even if they've already made millions, Google will lose a decent amount of market after developers leave their platform because of these law suits. Imagine 2 or 3 of Googles major games dropping support for Android because law suits they lost in court.

blubb-fish• 10 years ago

How about a patent about placing the right foot into a solid hollow object with three to four cylinder shaped objects (with low height to radius ratio) separating that hollow object from the surface of the earth - yeah - and well, then driving with it ... will have to think about how to make that sound smart and original.

How is this even for real - why is Google not putting an end to it?

fouric• 10 years ago

While I applaud what Austin Meyer is doing by raising awareness about patent trolls, does anyone here but me wish that the content had been made available in some sort of text medium instead? I can't think of any important parts of the video that couldn't have been reasonably conveyed through the use of text.

angry-hacker3• 10 years ago

I agree, but maybe because he said he wants to raise the awareness of 'simple' people, such as jurors, etc. Video is probably better medium to go viral than some text about software parents regarding non techies.

awqrre• 10 years ago

Not as condensed as true text, but you can download the CC: http://downsub.com/index.php?title=I+am+being+sued%2C+in+Eas...

slmyers• 10 years ago

I'm not sure if this would help, but I think we should all tweet a link to this video clip to John Oliver.

https://twitter.com/iamjohnoliver?lang=en

or maybe this twitter account

https://twitter.com/LastWeekTonight?lang=en

devrs02• 10 years ago

He has already covered it once: https://youtu.be/3bxcc3SM_KA?t=96

FesterCluck• 10 years ago

I thought we already squashed this shit: http://www.engadget.com/2016/03/26/uniloc-patent-troll-defea...

vosbert• 10 years ago

Can these services just be disabled in East Texas to avoid their jurisdiction? At the very least, it would force the patent trolls into more neutral territory.

swsieber• 10 years ago

That's a very interesting idea. I wonder if it's a viable option.

edit: It'd actually be pretty effective if you stop to think about it, even if it doesn't technically prevent litigation.

Just think: "Sorry, this product isn't available in you're area due to patent litigation concerns". Part of me wonders if that happened with Netflix, Google Maps, etc. wouldn't the people start hating the patent litigation instead of being content with it?

captainmuon2• 10 years ago

That is kind of the nuclear option of the big internet companies. I'm sure they realize that they have this power, but they can only use it rarely, maybe once, before there is public outcry against this "abuse of power". They're probably saving this card it for a bigger issue.

thirdsun• 10 years ago

Interesting thought. You should ask german Youtube users how they feel about GEMA. You certainly won't hear rave reviews.

ramblenode• 10 years ago

I have been wondering the same thing. If not outright disabling the service, would it be sufficient to license one's software in a way that prohibits it being used in East Texas? Would that remove standing to sue in the district?

jhayward4• 10 years ago

Wouldn't work. The plaintiff only needs to show a nexus to the venue; all they have to do is open an office there to achieve that.

kevinpet• 10 years ago

I happened to read this article about recusal recently and I don't understand how some of these allegations wouldn't be explicit grounds for recusal, specifically the son being a lawyer with a firm that tries cases in the father's court.

https://popehat.com/2016/06/06/lawsplainer-when-must-federal... Article is in the context of Trump, but you needn't let that turn you off.

djsumdog2• 10 years ago

America needs to follow New Zealand's example:

Ban software patents!

vacri• 10 years ago

In the video, he says that the politicians stopped the issue from even being voted on. That's without Silicon Valley stepping in to really lobby against that kind of ban (NZ has no equivalent of SV)

deepsun2• 10 years ago

Big companies in Silicon Valley can defend themselves, so they don't care. It's small businesses that are affected.

And big companies do not really want competition from small businesses.

fredguth• 10 years ago

Software is not patentable in Brazil either.

Honest question: have anyone seen any software innovation been really protected by a patent litigation? All articles I have seen are about trolls.

Grishnakh6• 10 years ago

Well if you're going to ask that question, I'm going to ask a corollary:

Has anyone seen any innovation that has been really protected by patents, that couldn't have been protected merely with trade secrets and industrial capability (i.e., big companies are physically and organizationally able to make things that small companies cannot due to their resources, therefore they're really the last ones to need patent protection, but they're also the ones most able to afford spending huge sums of money on patent fees and enforcement)?

mmaunder2• 10 years ago

Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8XknFl1l_8

He visits East Texas and shows that the 'offices' of the 'companies' that hold each patent are empty shells.

tedmiston4• 10 years ago

To save someone 8 minutes:

Tl;dr: He visits the listed offices of several dozen patent trolls in East Texas, including one directly across from the court house. Each one is empty with no sign of human activity. One has a secretary who claims the address is the accounting firm for those businesses. Then one person comes out to say that he is "a representative" of the businesses, and that those businesses "are based in East Texas" though. He recites one sentence about patents being property and then the video creator is kicked out.

quest88• 10 years ago

Ah yes. Former East Texan here. One company, Personal Web (http://www.personalweb.com/about.html), setup shop near the courthouse. They came to our school claiming they were going to be working on the next version of the web, web 3.0. They were recruiting for part-time only students. I asked why they chose east texas, and they said because they owned many patents wanted to be near the court that here's many technology patent cases.

1) The patent reason is a giveaway what they were really up to. 2) Why would you only hire part-time students? They were simply trying to build up a credible reputation in the community as a "small, local shop hiring locals" going against the big guys.

Steko• 10 years ago

How is this fundamentally different from our beloved SV startups organizing themselves as Delaware C-Corps?

johansch• 10 years ago

How do you americans still allow East Texas to be a part of the United States? They're clearly rogue?

cft• 10 years ago

One practical thing one could do is to forward this to an influential tech journalist, ideally to a mainstream publication that has a technology section, like CNN or WSJ.

superbatfish• 10 years ago

At least that totally rad cliff diving video that YouTube queued up afterwards was a nice chaser.

shivsta• 10 years ago

Might have been specifically recommended for you. Mine was different.

iLoch• 10 years ago

Is the process of filing a patent patented?

Alupis• 10 years ago

Judge Leonard Davis presides over a large amount of these "Patent Troll" cases, and his son (!!) Bo Davis is a Lawyer who represents these very same Patent Trolls in court!

If that's not a racket, I don't know what is.

captainmuon2• 10 years ago

There's only so far a justice system can get dysfunctional before people say fukitall and it looses its legitimacy. It's not just patents, civil forfeiture is another thing that comes to mind and I'm sure there more.

I imagine if in future somebody gets such a patent lawsuit, they'd just rip up the letter and throw it away. Police comes to carry out court orders because they decided in absence? "Sorry officer, the reason you're here is just patent bullshit." - "Oh well, I won't lift a finger for these idiots. Sorry for bothering you, have a nice day!"

Or a more extreme reaction: already in this thread, a couple of people are fantasizing about violence, hiring a hitman and so on. I realize it is mostly meant jokingly, but self-justice is another effect of a justice system that's lost legitimacy.

Rule-of-law is a great thing to have, but it only works if these laws are somewhat reasonable and in accord with peoples moral values...

VonGuard• 10 years ago

OK HN, get out there and find this man some prior art so we can all just put this company out of business...

KON_Air• 10 years ago

All the Mobile Marketplaces are on fire. Nice.

Posted from my Windows Phone 8.1

masswerk• 10 years ago

What to do about this?

I'm told, you may be put to trial in East Texas, if you're selling your goods or services there. – So, why not stop selling to East Texas and let them settle the resulting collision of interests themselves?

throwawaysocks• 10 years ago

Can a lawyer or something with legal background please weigh in on this?

dragonwriter2• 10 years ago

(1) That would probably work under the existing rules.

(2) There is an active legal challenge to the existing rules (arguing that they misapply two separate provisions of law as if one controls a definition in the other, when that is not the case), which if successful would radically shake up patent venue and pretty much end the "drag everyone into ED Texas" thing we have going on right now. [0]

[0] http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/04/circuit-continues-allowa...

veeragoni• 10 years ago

Someone patent "the idea of having a patent" and Sue these companies in Hawaii.

stevesun21• 10 years ago

WTF! This is ridiculous. later these people might start sue people use cell phone.

dak1• 10 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ric_Richardson

"Ric Richardson is an Australian inventor. He is the holder of multiple granted patents including the Uniloc patent US5490216 and the Logarex patent 6400293. Although he spent twelve years in California to promote and develop products produced by Uniloc, Richardson grew up in Sydney and currently resides just outside Byron Bay.

He is the founder of Uniloc, a company based on the technology he first patented in 1992."

Here's his picture from the Uniloc web site: http://uniloc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/ricrichardson.p...

He's apparently insanely talented, having "invented" the panic button, the visual voice recorder, the 3G skype phone, the secure browser, the universal database, the carbon scrubber, the book dispensor, "media objects", the "Internet Computer", QR Codes, DRM, a password replacement system, TV muting, and several dozen other devices, just in the past 16 years alone.[1]

[1] https://sites.google.com/site/ricricho/ric-s-inventions

igravious2• 10 years ago

Full name: Frederick Bailier Richardson III

Am thinking these activities devalue the terms invention and inventor. Would prefer that to patent some process that you had invented you ought to have to come up with a device to implement said process. You may not even know how to realise your idea in practise which is kind of where all the hard work is. An not saying idea for processes are ten a penny but the bar needs to be raised.

Sharma• 10 years ago

How about creating a petition here about this issue and we all sign it?

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/

nichochar• 10 years ago

Welcome to america

touchofevil• 10 years ago

Would incorporating your tech company in England instead of the USA protect your company from these patent troll lawsuits? It's extremely easy to start a company based in England, even as a US citizen living in the USA. With the patent trolling this out of control in the US at the moment, would basing your company abroad offer you any protection?

woah• 10 years ago

No.

Grishnakh6• 10 years ago

Yes, if your product or service is only available in England.

No, if you sell your product or service in the US (or at least East Texas). It doesn't matter where your company is incorporated, it only matters where you do business.

froo• 10 years ago

Someone really needs to create a patent that defines methods of patent trolling, so every time one of these scumbags starts a lawsuit you can sue them.

mcbits• 10 years ago

Someone (Halliburton!) already tried: http://www.google.com/patents/US20080270152

Edit: And IBM apparently got one granted: http://www.google.com/patents/US8386350

chadcmulligan• 10 years ago

lol, after a quick glance at the IBM one it seems to be patenting software that manages patent portfolios (maybe). How utterly bizarre

mdip• 10 years ago

Patent trolling issues aside (they're valid, but discussed and I'm just another one of the "software patents suck guys"), I'm surprised that Google doesn't provide protection for developers using the Play Store. It's a very critical service for developers writing code for Android -- though it's not always required it is if you want your app to be seen.

They certainly don't have to and I'm not sure if Apple or Microsoft do or not for their equivalents, but I know Microsoft offers patent indemnification for a lot of things these days. It would be in Google's best interest to have a patent indemnification policy for Google Play store.

I'd love to know what the actual numbers look like but I'd be willing to bet that the costs are extremely low since it works as a deterrent to these kinds of lawsuits. Patent trolls go after these lone developers because they'll settle rather than incur the cost. It's an easy buck. This guy didn't make Google Play, he didn't write the code that "supposedly" infringed on the patent. He simply used it because that's the only way for practical purposes to publish an Android app. And since the patent covers a large set of features that Play uses for licensing, he couldn't have published through Play and not infringed in the eyes of Uniloc. The law allows anyone in the chain (including the guy playing with the Flight Simulator) to be sued for infringement, but they'd be very unlikely to do this kind of garbage if they knew Google would bring their legal team into the fold. By not protecting their developers, Google has a deterrent to people using their platform.

abrookewood• 10 years ago

Here's written coverage of the situation in case you don't have time to watch the video: http://www.technobuffalo.com/2016/06/07/x-plane-flight-simul...

jitix• 10 years ago

Somehow this all seems illegal. I'm not that familiar with the US law so can somebody explain if the defendant can claim that the judge has a conflict of interest and is not fit to handle the case because his son profits from it?

arcticfox• 10 years ago

Well it's very unlikely the judge directly works his son's cases due to that obvious conflict. Rather, the judge works a random set of cases brought in East Texas and works them favorably for trolls. So many troll cases get brought in that district, hoping for this judge or other friendly judges.

It's obviously rotten but that one-step removed corruption is probably not explicitly codified as wrong anywhere. Hopefully the legal system finds a way to root it out.

BuckRogers• 10 years ago

If Google won't step in and litigate the patent trolls into poverty, ruining everyone's life who is involved and possibly even promising to ruin their children's and grandchildren's lives long after the actual patent trolls are dead...

that would stop it.

But in the meantime, guess I'll just be writing webapps.

thinkcomp• 10 years ago

The docket for the lawsuit in question is here:

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/sknqayqz/texas-eastern-dist...

dematio• 10 years ago

If Peter Thiel could do it, why not Google? It does not cost much for Google to invalidate the patent.

rwhitman2• 10 years ago

Yet another example of the consumer software industry being completely impotent when it comes to defending itself.

Patent trolls file these frivolous lawsuits because they make millions and suffer zero consequences for their actions. Why? Because there is no industry trade group representing the software industry with any sort of teeth. They know software developers have money, and they know software developers are absurdly weak when it comes to defending themselves. Software developers are easy prey.

Other than the EFF who is out there to represent us with any measure of real leverage over the legal process? Who is out there with the muscle to make patent trolls and software unfriendly lawmakers have second thoughts when targeting developers?

With no lobbies or trade associations with any sort of power out there representing consumer software, anyone with even minor influence over government can simply walk all over software developers, again and again and again. The consumer software industry has enormous amounts of cash at it's disposal, surely a few cash rich companies can pool enough resources together to kick off a trade association worthy of punching back, hard

dancablam• 10 years ago

Somebody needs to create a FUPA for anti-patent trolling

bnycum• 10 years ago

I live less than an hour from Marshall, TX. Maybe an hour and a half from Tyler, TX. I'd love to help in any way I could, but since I'm not a lawyer I bet anything I could do is slim to nothing.

floatalong• 10 years ago

As angry as this video makes me, I'd point out that we've been making some progress in the fight against trolls. Yes, they're still a problem, but some things that have weakened them:

The Supreme Court's ruling in Alice v. CLS Bank, which dealt a fatal blow to a lot of software patents out there (especially the awful, vague and overly broad patents that trolls love so much). The Supreme Court reaffirmed that merely "adding a generic computer to perform generic computer functions" does not make an otherwise abstract idea patentable. [0] This ruling helps get rid of cases earlier. While it doesn't kill off patent litigation, it makes it easier for us to fight low-quality assertions. More importantly, this puts a tougher filter for prosecution of new patent applications, the vast majority of which are dumb and overly broad.

Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, which are rather expensive (average $278,000) [1], but are much cheaper than litigation. Third parties can use IPRs to challenge patent claims (patentability) based on prior art patents and publications. In the case of Austin Meyer's patent defense, many of the patent claims were invalidated through this kind of proceeding, and petitioned by a consortium (Distinctive Developments, Ltd., Electronic Arts Inc., Gameloft S.E., Halfbrick Studios Pty Ltd., Laminar Research LLC, Mojang AB and Square Enix, Inc.). [2]

Heightened pleading standards. Before December 2015, it used to be that trolls could sue dozens of companies with cookie-cutter complaints, citing no real facts, and put on pressure for settlements by threatening lengthy and costly discovery proceedings. But thanks to decisions in Iqbal/Twombly, complaints must plead facts and recite aspects of the accused product that are alleged to infringe. This butchers the spam lawsuit tactic, and the day before this went into effect, trolls filed a one day record for new suits. [3] Shameful, yes, but it's helped clarify standards governing motions to dismiss.

[0] https://www.eff.org/files/2014/06/19/alice-corp._v._cls-bank...

[1] https://www.rpxcorp.com/2015/07/02/iprs-reality-amid-the-pyr...

[2] search patent number 6857067 and document 37 at https://ptabtrials.uspto.gov

[3] http://fortune.com/2015/12/02/patent-lawsuit-record/

owaislone• 10 years ago

Will Peter Thiel help? These trolls are actually destroying lives.

cgtyoder• 10 years ago

"I'm not here to raise awareness! Ok, yes, maybe that's what I'm doing."

zoner• 10 years ago

So do not register your company in the USA, otherwise you have to deal with patent trolls.

TheMagicHorsey• 10 years ago

The American patent system is a dead weight drag on the American software economy. The quality of software patents is atrocious, and the value of the tiny fraction of good patents in this space does not make up for the Billions lost to trolls and the costs of administering the system.

pascalxus2• 10 years ago

For all the entrepreneurs looking for a problem to solve, here it is: Create a company/product that automates legal services (start with the niche case for defending against Patent Trolls): then offer it as a service, say with a flat fee. If the cost of this service is on the order of hundreds of dollars, say less than 500$, it should solve the problem of frivolous law suits. This sub-niche is huge!

x13• 10 years ago

Glad to see he won.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbyW_QS8Ef8

Being sued, in East Texas, for using the Google Play Store [video]

Related Stories