Tuesday, May 23rd 2017

Patent Trolls to Lose their "Homefield" Advantage Thanks to Supreme Court

Thanks to a ruling from the Supreme Court, patent trolls could see their designs being thwarted more often than they have until today. Patent trolls stand as a scourge of the industry, ie, companies and even individuals that hold intellectual property with the sole purpose of levying infringement lawsuits against other companies - without producing anything themselves. They're kind of the leeches of the tech and business worlds, without some of the benefits their biological counterparts manage to deliver.
The latest ruling comes as a result of a legal battle between beverage flavoring company TC Heartland LLC and food and beverage company Kraft Heinz Co. Heartland attempted to get the matter transferred to its home state of Indiana, arguing that it has no presence in Delaware and that 98 percent of its sales come from outside of the state. Justices with the US Supreme Court voted 8-0 on Monday that patent infringement lawsuits can only be filed in courts where the defendant is incorporated, overturning a previous ruling by the US Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which ruled, last year, that patent lawsuits can be held anywhere a defendant's products are sold.

That's quite an interesting sphere of locales, to be sure. Considering that, it's at least strange (not to say suspicious) how 40 percent of all patent suits in the US are filed in East Texas. This happens because East Texas has a history of rulings in favor of the so-called patent-trolls, and history really does tend to inform present and future action. This ruling should put some cold water on some patent troll's endeavors, simply from the added unpredictability of suing in a state that doesn't have a history of ruling in favor of them.

I've taken the liberty of leaving an interesting infographic below for your perusal, as well as the result of a study on patent trolls circa 2013, from the archives of the previous administration.
Sources: TechSpot, Lotempio Law, White House.gov Archives
Add your own comment

34 Comments on Patent Trolls to Lose their "Homefield" Advantage Thanks to Supreme Court

#26
R-T-B
Caring1So basically this ruling is giving hope to those that want to steal a product or idea, and have the money to back themselves.
Patent owners will lose, this is not a good thing.
And!
I must protest the use of the term, Patent Troll.
The use of that term infers negative connotations on the patent owners, who have legal right to all property under their patent(s).
The negative connotation is justified when the patent holders do nothing with their patents: That is part of the definition. Its very nature is parasitic.
Posted on Reply
#27
Caring1
R-T-BThe negative connotation is justified when the patent holders do nothing with their patents: That is part of the definition. Its very nature is parasitic.
So owning a patent and earning royalties from its use is parasitic, I thought that was called business.
Posted on Reply
#28
silkstone
Caring1So owning a patent and earning royalties from its use is parasitic, I thought that was called business.
The real problem doesn't lie with the enforcement of patents, but the granting of patents.

Some patents are granted that are so generic that they can apply to multiple products and others are granted that cover products that already exist. When they are fought in court, the PAEs usually lose, but it costs a company money to defend and so they usually just give them 'go-away' money.

PAEs will often file suit in friendly districts where the courts are less likely to invalidate their patents so it's often not worth the risk to try defending.
Posted on Reply
#29
R-T-B
Caring1So owning a patent and earning royalties from its use is parasitic, I thought that was called business.
No, owning a patent and refusing to license or innovate with it in favor of litigation on highly generic terms is not normal business.
Posted on Reply
#30
DeathtoGnomes
R-T-BNo, owning a patent and refusing to license or innovate with it in favor of litigation on highly generic terms is not normal business.
No, owing a patent and bending over so everyone with a lawyer can F*** you over in court is normal business.
Posted on Reply
#31
R-T-B
DeathtoGnomesNo, owing a patent and bending over so everyone with a lawyer can F*** you over in court is normal business.
Definitions, my dear Watson, definitions.

Some of us view business as an actual legitimate enterprise. Crazy, I know.
Posted on Reply
#32
DeathtoGnomes
Patent trolls view what they do as legitimate business too. They're in it for the money too. :eek::kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#33
R-T-B
DeathtoGnomesPatent trolls view what they do as legitimate business too. They're in it for the money too. :eek::kookoo:
The difference being, how much harm does your business cause vs what does it actually produce?

The problem here is patent trolls produce nothing. Nada. You can't divide by 0, so they don't even make a ratio.
Posted on Reply
#34
qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
FordGT90ConceptThat wasn't Trump's choice. FCC votes for its own chairman. Pei came into power because he's the highest ranking Republican on the board. When Republicans took control of Senate, Pei became chairman of the board. Everyone and their dog knew Pei would end the pro-public rules FCC established under Wheeler. Pei always was and remains a shill for providers, especially ones with deep pockets (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast).
That's not what I read on various news sites. The basics of it were that he doesn't like net neutrality so he put this character in there to kill it.
I'm talking about established news sites like the BBC, The Register, Huffington Post etc. I think even TPU might have covered it, but don't quote me on it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 23rd, 2024 07:15 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts