Thursday, February 28, 2013

#10: Trolls

Yesterday, Gregory Ferenstein, posted an article in TechCrunch called “Law Would Force Patent Trolls To Pay For Failed Lawsuits Against Innovators,” in which he discussed some ways in which law makers hope to deter patent trolls. I thought I would summarize this article because we talked about defining exactly what a patent troll does. Patent trolls buy up patents they did not produce themselves and sue companies who infringe those patents as well as companies who do not. They are considered “trolls” because their profit platform is based on returns from law suits. According to the article lawmakers decided higher penalties for entities that abuse the patent system may bring this “troll-like” behavior to a halt. According to the article a bipartisan bill, called SHEILD, has been proposed to “force so-called patent trolls, those who hoard patents for the sole purpose of suing innovators, to pay the legal costs if their frivolous patent lawsuits fail in court.” The act is supported by many major tech companies as these companies do not add any economic benefit to the country. Apparently, trolls account for “61% of all patent disputes!” The president as well as the new chair of the House Judiciary Committee are in full support of the plan. People that disagree with the bill. Alexander Poltorak, CEO of General Patent Corporation, argues that SHIELD Act supporters are overestimating the amount of lawsuits that are driven by trolls and claims that the act “was designed to ‘intimidate patent owners whose IP rights are routinely infringed by corporate bullies.’” The SHEILD Act will be changing its requirements soon to encompass not only the tech firms but all other industries as well. Ultimately, the act would create a “loser’s pay” system to deter unnecessary.  

http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/27/law-would-force-patent-trolls-to-pay-for-failed-lawsuits-against-innovators/

2 comments:

  1. “loser’s pay” system to deter unnecessary litigation make a lot sense. However, if that's the case the patent can not be use as the tactic for corporations. Apple’s patent cases against Samsung were a tactic to curb the explosive growth of the Galaxy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The proposal sounds like a good idea, but one of the main problems with it would be defining who is a patent troll and who is not. A company could just as easily argue that they were genuinely suing a company because they believed there was infringement on one of their purchased patents. In other words, the line between troll and legitimate might become blurry in some instances.

    ReplyDelete