decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Link to ArsTechnica | 167 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Link to ArsTechnica
Authored by: MDT on Tuesday, October 23 2012 @ 12:45 PM EDT
ArsTechnica Article

---
MDT

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple's Rubber Band Patent Tentatively Rejected on Reexamination ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 23 2012 @ 01:05 PM EDT
I suppose now they might want to use the 2005 patent in their lawsuits now :p?
Though I suppose it could get invalidated as well. Makes me wonder if those
owning the patents used to invalidate other patents might get ideas about into
this business, assuming the patents are still enforceable.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Sue the Apple employee
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 23 2012 @ 02:19 PM EDT

From the Ars article:

Apple's rubber band claim is rejected because of two pieces of prior art, one a patent by AOL and the other a patent by the very same Apple employee responsible for the rubber band patent.

When applying for a patent, the applicant signs an affidavit, backed by perjury, saying they are not aware of any prior art. Since it is the same inventor on both patents, the usual defense of "I was not aware of this patent" does not hold.

Even if the damages are only $30M, sue that developer for that amount, for damages he (I'm assuming he's not a she) caused.

Sure, he does not have that kind of money, but this is not about getting money back. This is about stopping the practice of blindly signing anything the company's lawyer puts in front of you. If engineers knew that submitting junk patents might put them in personal risk, companies will start seeing push back from within.

Just my personal wet dream....

Shachar

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )