|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 20 2013 @ 02:47 AM EDT |
If you have dispositive proof that the troll does not own the patent(s)
that would indeed cause ruffled feathers. But if all you are trying to
do is to force the troll to prove ownership, then ownership of what?
Since most of the wealth of the US is generated by buying and selling
pieces of paper, I would expect most well prepared trolls to easily
prove their ownership of the piece of paper, whatever form the title
to a patent has.
After all that's how SCO proved in court that they owned the Unix copyrights.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 20 2013 @ 11:43 AM EDT |
This is also the thought that occurred to me. I would have thought that the
company being sued would simply say that the troll doesn't own the patent, and
then ask for the case to be dismissed immediately on those grounds. It should
then be up to the troll to prove the chain of ownership. Even if the case
doesn't make it to court, the company being sued ought to be asking for proof of
ownership.
I think part of the problem though is that companies being sued don't share
information about trolls. If there were organizations collecting information
about trolls much like advertisers collect information about consumers, people
could start to build strategies against them.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
