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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
'the number of patents to be examined for potential violation' | 81 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
'the number of patents to be examined for potential violation'
Authored by: jkrise on Friday, January 04 2013 @ 12:15 PM EST
The litigant with the largest patent pool would be the most likely to succeed...

Ir-respective of the quality of the patents, and in my post, I have suggested a method to solve this vexatious problem. Let us say,a patentee alleges that the defendant has infringed on 100 patents. He must be allowed to present evidence for ALL THE 100 patents, instead of compelling him to reduce it to 3 or 4. But there should be 2 conditions:

1. If only 3 out of the 100 patents are found to be infringed; the damages must be computed as 3 / 100 * price of infringing product. Such a formula encourages the patentee to bring lesser patents to suit.

2. Additionally; all 100 patents must be re-examined preliminarily, and conclusively. A 10-fold penalty has to be levied on every invalid patent, brought in suit. Suppose 67 patents out of the 100 are found to be conclusively invalid. The plaintiff should be fined 67 * 10 * full price of allegedly infringing product of defendant.

Under such a system, the court is not arbitrarily restricting the number of allegedly genuine, valuable patents that are brought in suit. It is the plaintiff who makes a calculated decision on how many patents to bring. If he seriously feels all 100 are genuine, valuable, and infringed, let him bring it on, and be rewarded. Else if brings on just 3, it is the plaintiff's decision, not an artificial restriction from the court.

[ 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 )