Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 18 2013 @ 02:19 AM EDT |
> identify as victims companies that just could not afford to fight
Exactly what is happening in e.g. the copier-scans-then-emails suits.
What is worse in these cases is that the equipment vendors seem
afraid of the argument that method claims are not exhausted on
first sale. Otherwise why aren't they galloping up trumpets blaring?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 18 2013 @ 05:41 AM EDT |
You know, there's some common wisdom in hostage situations:
Never Negotiate with those Threatening you.
It's good advice for other forms of blackmail as well.
NewEgg and Google have the right idea, and I'm sure I'm paraphrasing a lot of
people here:
Don't pick a fight.
But if someone picks a fight, make sure that they live to tell others how much
they regretted it.
And make sure that they're unable to attack you agin in the same way.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 2013 @ 10:36 AM EDT |
What makes SEPs any less dangerous then regular patents in the hands of
trolls?
After all - regular patents become SEP's only after the market
has stabilized some and a standard is being viewed for that market. Consider
the market of Office documents as an example. How many decades was the Office
Document software being produced before the first standard for Office Document
formats - ODF - was formed?
Additionally:
Standards in the market are
formed before they become official (even if business minds don't understand how
software interacts, we developers do so we reach agreements in communications
even if they're not official) - so there are non-official SEPs out there not
being called an SEP because they apply against de-facto
standards.
Trolls don't care if you actually infringe - only if at a
very brief reading you could infringe.
So what makes SEPs any more
dangerous then non-SEPs?
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|