SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  6
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states
Part 14 – Patent trolls

Abstract
It is important to separate those who buy patent portfolios out of a strategic interest to add on protection to their
product portfolios and those who have as their business idea to buy patents, but have no products to offer in their
company. The latter often called patent trolls. President Obama has accused tech industry patent trolls of trying to
"hijack somebody's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them". In order to combat the misuse of
patents by especially patent trolls both new legal measurers has to be implemented and financial resources has to be
allocated.

Background
Helping geniuses! Our slogan sums up whom Somerco aims to help. Somerco are a company
that target to help researchers and innovators so that these geniuses can create prosperity and
jobs in society. This paper is an odyssey in the realities companies has to deal with when it
concerns patent trolls and the measures discussed and taken by governments to tackle these
problems.

Introduction
It is important to separate those who buy patent portfolios out of a strategic interest to add on
protection to their product portfolios and those who have as their business idea to buy patents,
but have no products to offer in their company.
The University of California's Prof Robin Feldman, one of the authors of a major study into
patent litigation has studied the latter group and she says: "The majority of patent lawsuits today
are filed by entities that don't make any products, in other words in your terminology by patent
trolls." "Their business model is based on extracting money from those who do make products."1
In US, patent trolls have become an increasing problem for all type companies – SMEs up to
companies in the size of Google.
"Our research has shown that in just five years the United States patent system has been turned on its head," says
Feldman.2

In Europe, patent trolls are not as common as in US even if they are active here as well. Many
patents are national but a fair share of patents is international. In pharmacy, software and
hardware much patents are international. Therefore, it is likely that not only European patent
trolls but also those from US will operate the same way here too in a near future.

Examples
In the first category, those who buy patents of strategic interest like the consortium Rockstar
Bidco who include Apple, Ericsson, RIM, Microsoft and Sony.

1
2

Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383
Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013

In 2011, when Canada-based telecom Nortel sold its biggest asset a portfolio of more than 6,000
patents covering 4G wireless innovations and a range of technologies. Google also bid for the
patents, but lost out to Rockstar against their bid for $4.5 billion.3
The second category are those who are earning money by licence fees that other companies has
to pay, which is in their legal right to do. The patent these patent trolls holds are sometimes
vaguely defined and give room for interpretation. This manoeuvre room is often used to ask
large companies and SMEs to pay a licence fee or face a potential lawsuit. Even if it is unclear if
the companies should pay a licence fee or settle the issue at all with the patent trolls it is a costly
procedure to hire IP-lawyers to check if there is any validity to their claims. The licence fee
patent trolls can be anything from $100 per employee and upwards.
An example on how patent trolls operate.
"There are a couple of different trolls who claim that they invented the technology behind wi-fi," […] " and they are
suing all kinds of companies, bars, hotels, restaurants. Anyone who offers wi-fi, they are saying you owe them
money."

And another extreme example concern scanning documents
"They claim that anyone who uses a scanner to scan documents, email the documents, owes them a royalty of
$1,000 [£645] per employee."[4]

There are plenty of examples like this that companies in US have to deal with. Most of the
examples on how patent trolls operate are more difficult to decide whether there are any legal
claims to ask for a licence fee or not. In these cases, the advice of patent attorney’s is necessary.
For all companies, claims for licence fees by patent trolls have become an unwelcome economic
burden. Company’s financial resources for expansion decreases and it becomes less resources to
R & D. Especially, for SMEs it can mean new recruitments have to be put on hold or some of its
new products have to be developed at a slower phase or put on hold.4
"Patent trolls are probably the single most common policy and legal problem our companies deal
with," said Nick Grossman of Union Square Ventures, a firm whose more famous bets include
investments in Twitter and Etsy. "Almost every time, it's a huge burden in terms of time and
costs, totally unrelated from the actual work of building start-ups. It's a constant drag on our
companies."5
Many times, if the companies do not dispute their claims and pay a licence fee or settle, suddenly
many new patent trolls emerge to ask them to pay other licence fees for other vaguely defined
patents.
Suggested measures
Patent trolls are in particular active in US. Large companies like Google who spends “tens of
millions” of dollars on a phalanx of in-house attorneys to defend itself against patent trolls,

3

Patent war goes nuclear: Microsoft, Apple-owned“Rockstar”sues Google. http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2013/10/patent-war-goes-nuclear-microsoft-apple-owned-rockstar-sues-google/
4
Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383
5
Prominent VCs join the fight in Congress to stop patent trolls http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2013/11/prominent-vcs-join-the-fight-to-stop-patent-trolls-in-congress/
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013

according to Tarrant has just as venture capitalists and SMEs put the problem on the political
agenda and several measures has been suggested by the US administration.6
President Obama has accused tech industry patent trolls of trying to "hijack somebody's idea and
see if they can extort some money out of them".
To tackle the problem he has called on Congress to introduce steps designed to discourage the
firms from suing. The measures include:





Requiring the parties who send demands to disclose who ultimately owns the patents, so
they cannot hide behind shell companies.
Make the demand letters public and searchable.
Make it easier for the courts to make the losing party pay for the winner's legal fees.
Offer better legal protection to purchasers of off-the-shelf products to safeguard them
against the risk of being sued for the manufacturer's patent infringement.

In addition the president announced steps he was taking that were within his powers. These
include:




The US Patent Office will require patent applicants and owners to provide updates on
who owns what if they come to the organisation with a dispute. The aim is to help
defendants know more about who they are facing and the connections that exist between
the various trolls.
Patent examiners are receiving extra training to try to minimise the risk of overly broad
claims being approved.7

From the senate
Two leading U.S. senators recently introduced a bill to make it harder for "patent trolls" to file
frivolous infringement lawsuits. That bill requires companies to provide specific details on what
patent is infringed when they file a lawsuit, and also to specify how it is used. It also requires
judges hearing patent cases to award fees to the winner in an infringement lawsuit, unless the
judge decides that the loser's position was "substantially justified" or some other circumstances
exist. The White House urged Congress in June to take steps to curb abusive patent lawsuits.
Other proposals are circulating on Capitol Hill, and the Federal Trade Commission is doing a
study of PAEs.8
From the House of Representatives
The SHIELD Act is a clever piece of legislation introduced by Rep. Peter DeFazio and Rep.
Jason Chaffetz. The backronym stands for Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal
Disputes. Under the Act, if the patent troll loses in court because the patent is found to be invalid
or there is no infringement, then it pays the other side’s costs and legal fees, which often stretch
into the millions of dollars. This "fee shifting" system would empower innovators to fight back,
while discouraging trolls from threatening lawsuits to start.9
6

Patent trolls take on Vermont businesses. http://tinyurl.com/p4p4yoh AND Top Venture Capitalists Demand Real
Patent Reform, Put To Rest Myth That VCs Love Patents. http://tinyurl.com/q9tajzl
7

Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383&
FACT SHEET: White House Task Force on High-Tech Patent Issues http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2013/06/04/fact-sheet-white-house-task-force-high-tech-patent-issues
8
U.S. Senate gets bill clamping down on 'patent trolls' http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/18/us-patentscongress-idUSBRE9AH19920131118
9
Patent trolls? http://www.ted.com/conversations/18940/patent_trolls.html
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013

Europe
Reactions on a pan-European patent system
The creation of a pan-European patent system will help spread abusive patent litigation to
Europe and could lead to E.U.-wide sales bans on products, leading tech vendors have claimed.
Tech giants including Apple, Google, Samsung, Microsoft, Cisco, HP, Yahoo, Intel and
BlackBerry sent an open letter to European officials outlining their concerns about the formation
of a new unified patent court system in the E.U.10
The EU’s proposal would create a unified patent court, replacing the current patchwork quilt of
countries all with differing levels of experience handling patent-infringement claims. Another
problem is the new system would split the question of whether infringement occurred from
consideration of if the patent is even valid. While the procedure is common in German courts,
the division on questions opens up “significant opportunities for abuse.”
Others like IPNav has written that the proposed change in how Europe handles patent challenges
is “a great benefit to innovators” and the new setup “is going to cut the cost of litigation down
significantly.”11
How it will work in Europe
While the unified system has been heralded as simplifying the patchwork of rules that currently
exist across the single European market, vendors say it also brings the threat of a one-stop-shop
for quick region-wide sales bans. And allowing cases to be split up, with the validity of a patent
decided in one court while infringement issues are decided in another, can expose product
vendors to penalties even before the patent in question is declared sound, they claim. The unified
patent agreement allows the validity and the infringement questions to be decided in different
courts in the same case. Splitting those decisions into separate cases is known as bifurcation.
If this system was to be introduced for most of the European market, it could lead to quick E.U.wide injunctions, barring products from the European market, before any determination of
whether the patent in question is actually valid, the companies said.
In the case of bifurcation, the companies' argument is not good, said Willem Hoyng [cq], a
member of the Preparatory Committee, in an email.
Bifurcation can only do harm if, as in Germany, the invalidity court is slower than the
infringement court, Hoyng said. "It is clear from the Rules of proceedings that should not happen
in the new system," he added. And even if there are weak patents, they do not survive in a court
of law manned by good judges, Hoyng wrote.12
My comments
It is probably true that weak patents would not survive in court. However, for many SMEs it is
not the issue. It is the economic burden that might not be rewarded until a few years later that it
is the concern for SMEs, innovators, but also for large companies, universities and research
institutes. For some companies, it means they have to withhold investments in new R & D,
expansion plans and new recruitments.
10

Patent trolls will gain from a single European system, vendors warn.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2049520/patent-trolls-will-gain-from-a-single-european-system-vendors-warn.html
AND Daily report: Tech Industry Warns Europe of Concerns on Patent Trolls
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/daily-report-tech-industry-warns-europe-of-concerns-on-patenttrolls/?_r=0
11
Apple and fellow tech titans expand fight against patent trolls to EU.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/09/27/apple-eu-patent-trolls/
12
Patent trolls will gain from a single European system, vendors warn.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2049520/patent-trolls-will-gain-from-a-single-european-system-vendors-warn.html
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013

There are different paths to consider correcting the misuse of the patent system. Since many
patents are international it is bound to be similarities in the application of laws and regulations
between countries. Therefore, it is interesting to discuss measures taken by other countries.
When it concerns US some measures has been presented above by the US President
administration, other by representatives at the Senate and members of the House of
Representatives.
Also when it concern EU there are an on-going debate and development of new legislation that
concern IP-rights that will be applicable in all EU states. The more harmonized and integrated
EUs IP-regulations become, it is considered the more will patent trolls be active here. Several
measures are discussed above.
The most measures proposed above are legal. In US, the SHIELD act present how companies
can be compensated financially if they win a case. This financial reward is a measure that comes
afterwards. However, in one of my earlier papers entitled Dedicated tax to science I discuss how
to get financial resources to IP-disputes for SMEs before for evaluation and for IP-disputes that
end ups in court.13 As mentioned above, it is not that companies might be right in the future that
is the major concern. It is the financial burden they carry meanwhile to dispute the claims for
licence fees put on them that concern companies and especially SMEs. The extra financial
burden inhibits the development of their companies. It is possible for countries in EU to give
SMEs help by adopting a designated tax to science. This will increase the competitiveness of the
EU-zone.
When it concern the financial aspects of IP-disputes it would be most effective to adopt my
suggestion that enable financial resources to SMEs to hire IP-lawyers and their investigators
before trial in combination with the SHIELD act. The SHIELD act propose if the patent troll
loses in court because the patent is found to be invalid or there is no infringement, then it pays
the other side’s costs and legal fees, which in US often stretch into the millions of dollars.

A thoughtful comment from a blog:
“Make trademarks and intellectual property ownership a privilege instead of a right, meaning that if a company
abuses the system for financial gain, then the patents or trademarks are revoked and the work is put in public
domain.”

Yours sincerely,

Jan Softa - Somerco Research

13

EC member states competitiveness in R & D Part 1: Designated tax to science. http://tinyurl.com/n5qrhdl
Jan Softa at Somerco

24/11/2013

Proposals
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 1 - Designated tax to science
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 2 – Strategy to support the software
industry
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 3 – Actions to support women in ICT
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 4 – Going abroad – Competitive assets
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 5 – Business incubators, financial
recycling and incentives into reward
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 6 – Standardization as a tool to increase
competitiveness
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 7 – Different types of innovations
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 8 – Open source from science to society
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 9 – Crowd sourcing and crowd funding
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 10 – Green VAT for business
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 11 - Keep talents in Europe
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 12 - Research leftovers
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 13 - Science Parks (In progress)
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 14 – Patent trolls
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 15 – No title yet
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Overview – Old and new key areas in order to
increase the competitiveness of the industry (In progress)
Input on threats against information society

http://www.slideshare.net/SomercoResearch

Contenu connexe

Tendances

5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job
5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job
5 Things to Do Before You Start A New JobCharles H. Martin
 
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...jhreescnm
 
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)Timothy LaBadie
 
Pob stage 1 seminar 16 sbd
Pob stage 1   seminar 16 sbdPob stage 1   seminar 16 sbd
Pob stage 1 seminar 16 sbdDiana Shore
 
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commerce
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-CommerceGlobal Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commerce
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commercewelcometofacebook
 
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015Richard Garrity
 
Cybersquatting
CybersquattingCybersquatting
Cybersquattingbobbyb85
 
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marks
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marksPurpose, function & acquisition of trade marks
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marksRajalingam Balakrishnan
 
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital age
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital ageTrademark Law - Brand protection in the digital age
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital ageJudy Yen
 
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediaries
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediariesOnline trademark infringement and the liability of intermediaries
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediariesIshan Gupta
 
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Uniform Domain Name Dispute ResolutionUniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolutionlibertyluver
 
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfare
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfareDennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfare
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfareclaytonnarcis
 
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright Essentials
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright EssentialsWhat’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright Essentials
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright EssentialsJason Springer
 
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)Joseph Onele
 
The Business of Naming Your Business: Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade Names
The Business of Naming Your Business:  Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade NamesThe Business of Naming Your Business:  Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade Names
The Business of Naming Your Business: Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade NamesKelley Keller, Esq.
 
Lab 5--Cybersquatting
Lab 5--CybersquattingLab 5--Cybersquatting
Lab 5--Cybersquattingaah3420
 
Domain name and trade dispute
Domain name and trade disputeDomain name and trade dispute
Domain name and trade disputeSaravanan A
 
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images)
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images) Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images)
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images) jhreescnm
 

Tendances (19)

5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job
5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job
5 Things to Do Before You Start A New Job
 
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...
Protecting your brand with strategies to address new generic top level domain...
 
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)
Transforming Legal Profession To Legal Services (Legal Industry Analysis)
 
Pob stage 1 seminar 16 sbd
Pob stage 1   seminar 16 sbdPob stage 1   seminar 16 sbd
Pob stage 1 seminar 16 sbd
 
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commerce
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-CommerceGlobal Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commerce
Global Cyber-Laws and E-Commerce & Strategic Implication for E-Commerce
 
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015
Human Resource Guidelines for Skyscraper Mgt April 2015
 
Cybersquatting
CybersquattingCybersquatting
Cybersquatting
 
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marks
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marksPurpose, function & acquisition of trade marks
Purpose, function & acquisition of trade marks
 
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital age
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital ageTrademark Law - Brand protection in the digital age
Trademark Law - Brand protection in the digital age
 
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediaries
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediariesOnline trademark infringement and the liability of intermediaries
Online trademark infringement and the liability of intermediaries
 
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Uniform Domain Name Dispute ResolutionUniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
 
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfare
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfareDennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfare
Dennis Carlton: Impact of new gTLD on consumer welfare
 
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright Essentials
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright EssentialsWhat’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright Essentials
What’s in a Name? Everything! Trademark and Copyright Essentials
 
Domain Dispute Presentation
Domain Dispute PresentationDomain Dispute Presentation
Domain Dispute Presentation
 
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)
Domain names and cybersquatting as deadly threats to trade marks in nigeria (2)
 
The Business of Naming Your Business: Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade Names
The Business of Naming Your Business:  Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade NamesThe Business of Naming Your Business:  Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade Names
The Business of Naming Your Business: Distinguishing Trademarks and Trade Names
 
Lab 5--Cybersquatting
Lab 5--CybersquattingLab 5--Cybersquatting
Lab 5--Cybersquatting
 
Domain name and trade dispute
Domain name and trade disputeDomain name and trade dispute
Domain name and trade dispute
 
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images)
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images) Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images)
Social media (american marketing association november 15, 2011)(wo images)
 

En vedette (6)

Indiegogo search2daysafter
Indiegogo search2daysafterIndiegogo search2daysafter
Indiegogo search2daysafter
 
Indiegogotweetsshort
IndiegogotweetsshortIndiegogotweetsshort
Indiegogotweetsshort
 
Bb bcaselink
Bb bcaselinkBb bcaselink
Bb bcaselink
 
Facebook ahmedabadpolice
Facebook ahmedabadpoliceFacebook ahmedabadpolice
Facebook ahmedabadpolice
 
Indiegogo toa
Indiegogo toaIndiegogo toa
Indiegogo toa
 
Facebook ahmedabadpolice
Facebook ahmedabadpoliceFacebook ahmedabadpolice
Facebook ahmedabadpolice
 

Similaire à Patent trolls

Trademark Vs Patent Law Essay
Trademark Vs Patent Law EssayTrademark Vs Patent Law Essay
Trademark Vs Patent Law EssayPatty Joseph
 
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...Rebecca Bordes
 
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docx
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docxLearning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docx
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docxsmile790243
 
Npe antitrust challenges - writing sample
Npe   antitrust challenges - writing sampleNpe   antitrust challenges - writing sample
Npe antitrust challenges - writing sampleBinQiang Liu
 
Business Negotiations Advantages And Disadvantages
Business Negotiations Advantages And DisadvantagesBusiness Negotiations Advantages And Disadvantages
Business Negotiations Advantages And DisadvantagesJessica Tanner
 
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our Differences
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our DifferencesLiving Together With Diversity By Valuing Our Differences
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our DifferencesElizabeth Jenkins
 
Getting Smart About Intellectual Property
Getting Smart About Intellectual PropertyGetting Smart About Intellectual Property
Getting Smart About Intellectual PropertyArvinPatel
 
The Pros And Cons Of Gene Patents
The Pros And Cons Of Gene PatentsThe Pros And Cons Of Gene Patents
The Pros And Cons Of Gene PatentsKaren Thompson
 
TTools Case Executive Summary Essay
TTools Case Executive Summary EssayTTools Case Executive Summary Essay
TTools Case Executive Summary EssayChristina Padilla
 
Questions On New Opposition Proceedings
Questions On New Opposition ProceedingsQuestions On New Opposition Proceedings
Questions On New Opposition ProceedingsJulie Potts
 
Investment Grade Asset_V6
Investment Grade Asset_V6Investment Grade Asset_V6
Investment Grade Asset_V6Paul Morinville
 
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone Industry
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone IndustryIntellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone Industry
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone IndustryAshley Thomas
 
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive Case
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive CaseCase Study Of Colgate-Palmolive Case
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive CaseKaren Hennings
 
Patent Protection Research Paper
Patent Protection Research PaperPatent Protection Research Paper
Patent Protection Research PaperMegan Foster
 
The Conflict Of Gene Patents
The Conflict Of Gene PatentsThe Conflict Of Gene Patents
The Conflict Of Gene PatentsPatricia Viljoen
 
Plavix Case Study Essay
Plavix Case Study EssayPlavix Case Study Essay
Plavix Case Study EssayAmy Washington
 
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT Act
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT ActGoogled Again - S1137 - The PATENT Act
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT ActPaul Morinville
 

Similaire à Patent trolls (20)

Technology Law Case Study
Technology Law Case StudyTechnology Law Case Study
Technology Law Case Study
 
Trademark Vs Patent Law Essay
Trademark Vs Patent Law EssayTrademark Vs Patent Law Essay
Trademark Vs Patent Law Essay
 
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...
Patent Strategies Like Evergreening Differently Impact The...
 
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docx
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docxLearning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docx
Learning ObjectivesAfter studying this chapter, you should be ab.docx
 
Npe antitrust challenges - writing sample
Npe   antitrust challenges - writing sampleNpe   antitrust challenges - writing sample
Npe antitrust challenges - writing sample
 
Business Negotiations Advantages And Disadvantages
Business Negotiations Advantages And DisadvantagesBusiness Negotiations Advantages And Disadvantages
Business Negotiations Advantages And Disadvantages
 
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our Differences
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our DifferencesLiving Together With Diversity By Valuing Our Differences
Living Together With Diversity By Valuing Our Differences
 
Getting Smart About Intellectual Property
Getting Smart About Intellectual PropertyGetting Smart About Intellectual Property
Getting Smart About Intellectual Property
 
A Call to Patents
A Call to PatentsA Call to Patents
A Call to Patents
 
The Pros And Cons Of Gene Patents
The Pros And Cons Of Gene PatentsThe Pros And Cons Of Gene Patents
The Pros And Cons Of Gene Patents
 
TTools Case Executive Summary Essay
TTools Case Executive Summary EssayTTools Case Executive Summary Essay
TTools Case Executive Summary Essay
 
Questions On New Opposition Proceedings
Questions On New Opposition ProceedingsQuestions On New Opposition Proceedings
Questions On New Opposition Proceedings
 
Investment Grade Asset_V6
Investment Grade Asset_V6Investment Grade Asset_V6
Investment Grade Asset_V6
 
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone Industry
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone IndustryIntellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone Industry
Intellectual Property And Patents In The Smartphone Industry
 
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive Case
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive CaseCase Study Of Colgate-Palmolive Case
Case Study Of Colgate-Palmolive Case
 
Patent Protection Research Paper
Patent Protection Research PaperPatent Protection Research Paper
Patent Protection Research Paper
 
The Conflict Of Gene Patents
The Conflict Of Gene PatentsThe Conflict Of Gene Patents
The Conflict Of Gene Patents
 
Trademarks Infringement
Trademarks InfringementTrademarks Infringement
Trademarks Infringement
 
Plavix Case Study Essay
Plavix Case Study EssayPlavix Case Study Essay
Plavix Case Study Essay
 
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT Act
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT ActGoogled Again - S1137 - The PATENT Act
Googled Again - S1137 - The PATENT Act
 

Plus de Somerco Research

Plus de Somerco Research (20)

Indiegogo mixstats
Indiegogo mixstatsIndiegogo mixstats
Indiegogo mixstats
 
Bbb printscreen jan
Bbb printscreen janBbb printscreen jan
Bbb printscreen jan
 
Indiegogobike3
Indiegogobike3Indiegogobike3
Indiegogobike3
 
Indiegogo miximportant2
Indiegogo miximportant2Indiegogo miximportant2
Indiegogo miximportant2
 
Indiegogo22campaigns
Indiegogo22campaignsIndiegogo22campaigns
Indiegogo22campaigns
 
Indiegogo technology3
Indiegogo technology3Indiegogo technology3
Indiegogo technology3
 
Listofcountries
ListofcountriesListofcountries
Listofcountries
 
Arctic route
Arctic routeArctic route
Arctic route
 
Build infrastructure
Build infrastructureBuild infrastructure
Build infrastructure
 
Digital magna carta privacy rights
Digital magna carta   privacy rightsDigital magna carta   privacy rights
Digital magna carta privacy rights
 
Digital inequality into prosperity
Digital inequality into prosperityDigital inequality into prosperity
Digital inequality into prosperity
 
External energy dependency
External energy dependencyExternal energy dependency
External energy dependency
 
Non ip parks
Non ip parksNon ip parks
Non ip parks
 
Old innovations
Old innovationsOld innovations
Old innovations
 
Innovation, commercialization,growth
Innovation, commercialization,growthInnovation, commercialization,growth
Innovation, commercialization,growth
 
Expansion options
Expansion optionsExpansion options
Expansion options
 
Different types of infrastructures
Different types of infrastructuresDifferent types of infrastructures
Different types of infrastructures
 
Treaty (knowledge transfer)
Treaty (knowledge transfer)Treaty (knowledge transfer)
Treaty (knowledge transfer)
 
Science e-Parks
Science e-ParksScience e-Parks
Science e-Parks
 
The locally developed infrastructure
The locally developed infrastructureThe locally developed infrastructure
The locally developed infrastructure
 

Patent trolls

  • 1. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 14 – Patent trolls Abstract It is important to separate those who buy patent portfolios out of a strategic interest to add on protection to their product portfolios and those who have as their business idea to buy patents, but have no products to offer in their company. The latter often called patent trolls. President Obama has accused tech industry patent trolls of trying to "hijack somebody's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them". In order to combat the misuse of patents by especially patent trolls both new legal measurers has to be implemented and financial resources has to be allocated. Background Helping geniuses! Our slogan sums up whom Somerco aims to help. Somerco are a company that target to help researchers and innovators so that these geniuses can create prosperity and jobs in society. This paper is an odyssey in the realities companies has to deal with when it concerns patent trolls and the measures discussed and taken by governments to tackle these problems. Introduction It is important to separate those who buy patent portfolios out of a strategic interest to add on protection to their product portfolios and those who have as their business idea to buy patents, but have no products to offer in their company. The University of California's Prof Robin Feldman, one of the authors of a major study into patent litigation has studied the latter group and she says: "The majority of patent lawsuits today are filed by entities that don't make any products, in other words in your terminology by patent trolls." "Their business model is based on extracting money from those who do make products."1 In US, patent trolls have become an increasing problem for all type companies – SMEs up to companies in the size of Google. "Our research has shown that in just five years the United States patent system has been turned on its head," says Feldman.2 In Europe, patent trolls are not as common as in US even if they are active here as well. Many patents are national but a fair share of patents is international. In pharmacy, software and hardware much patents are international. Therefore, it is likely that not only European patent trolls but also those from US will operate the same way here too in a near future. Examples In the first category, those who buy patents of strategic interest like the consortium Rockstar Bidco who include Apple, Ericsson, RIM, Microsoft and Sony. 1 2 Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383 Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383
  • 2. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 In 2011, when Canada-based telecom Nortel sold its biggest asset a portfolio of more than 6,000 patents covering 4G wireless innovations and a range of technologies. Google also bid for the patents, but lost out to Rockstar against their bid for $4.5 billion.3 The second category are those who are earning money by licence fees that other companies has to pay, which is in their legal right to do. The patent these patent trolls holds are sometimes vaguely defined and give room for interpretation. This manoeuvre room is often used to ask large companies and SMEs to pay a licence fee or face a potential lawsuit. Even if it is unclear if the companies should pay a licence fee or settle the issue at all with the patent trolls it is a costly procedure to hire IP-lawyers to check if there is any validity to their claims. The licence fee patent trolls can be anything from $100 per employee and upwards. An example on how patent trolls operate. "There are a couple of different trolls who claim that they invented the technology behind wi-fi," […] " and they are suing all kinds of companies, bars, hotels, restaurants. Anyone who offers wi-fi, they are saying you owe them money." And another extreme example concern scanning documents "They claim that anyone who uses a scanner to scan documents, email the documents, owes them a royalty of $1,000 [£645] per employee."[4] There are plenty of examples like this that companies in US have to deal with. Most of the examples on how patent trolls operate are more difficult to decide whether there are any legal claims to ask for a licence fee or not. In these cases, the advice of patent attorney’s is necessary. For all companies, claims for licence fees by patent trolls have become an unwelcome economic burden. Company’s financial resources for expansion decreases and it becomes less resources to R & D. Especially, for SMEs it can mean new recruitments have to be put on hold or some of its new products have to be developed at a slower phase or put on hold.4 "Patent trolls are probably the single most common policy and legal problem our companies deal with," said Nick Grossman of Union Square Ventures, a firm whose more famous bets include investments in Twitter and Etsy. "Almost every time, it's a huge burden in terms of time and costs, totally unrelated from the actual work of building start-ups. It's a constant drag on our companies."5 Many times, if the companies do not dispute their claims and pay a licence fee or settle, suddenly many new patent trolls emerge to ask them to pay other licence fees for other vaguely defined patents. Suggested measures Patent trolls are in particular active in US. Large companies like Google who spends “tens of millions” of dollars on a phalanx of in-house attorneys to defend itself against patent trolls, 3 Patent war goes nuclear: Microsoft, Apple-owned“Rockstar”sues Google. http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2013/10/patent-war-goes-nuclear-microsoft-apple-owned-rockstar-sues-google/ 4 Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383 5 Prominent VCs join the fight in Congress to stop patent trolls http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2013/11/prominent-vcs-join-the-fight-to-stop-patent-trolls-in-congress/
  • 3. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 according to Tarrant has just as venture capitalists and SMEs put the problem on the political agenda and several measures has been suggested by the US administration.6 President Obama has accused tech industry patent trolls of trying to "hijack somebody's idea and see if they can extort some money out of them". To tackle the problem he has called on Congress to introduce steps designed to discourage the firms from suing. The measures include:     Requiring the parties who send demands to disclose who ultimately owns the patents, so they cannot hide behind shell companies. Make the demand letters public and searchable. Make it easier for the courts to make the losing party pay for the winner's legal fees. Offer better legal protection to purchasers of off-the-shelf products to safeguard them against the risk of being sued for the manufacturer's patent infringement. In addition the president announced steps he was taking that were within his powers. These include:   The US Patent Office will require patent applicants and owners to provide updates on who owns what if they come to the organisation with a dispute. The aim is to help defendants know more about who they are facing and the connections that exist between the various trolls. Patent examiners are receiving extra training to try to minimise the risk of overly broad claims being approved.7 From the senate Two leading U.S. senators recently introduced a bill to make it harder for "patent trolls" to file frivolous infringement lawsuits. That bill requires companies to provide specific details on what patent is infringed when they file a lawsuit, and also to specify how it is used. It also requires judges hearing patent cases to award fees to the winner in an infringement lawsuit, unless the judge decides that the loser's position was "substantially justified" or some other circumstances exist. The White House urged Congress in June to take steps to curb abusive patent lawsuits. Other proposals are circulating on Capitol Hill, and the Federal Trade Commission is doing a study of PAEs.8 From the House of Representatives The SHIELD Act is a clever piece of legislation introduced by Rep. Peter DeFazio and Rep. Jason Chaffetz. The backronym stands for Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes. Under the Act, if the patent troll loses in court because the patent is found to be invalid or there is no infringement, then it pays the other side’s costs and legal fees, which often stretch into the millions of dollars. This "fee shifting" system would empower innovators to fight back, while discouraging trolls from threatening lawsuits to start.9 6 Patent trolls take on Vermont businesses. http://tinyurl.com/p4p4yoh AND Top Venture Capitalists Demand Real Patent Reform, Put To Rest Myth That VCs Love Patents. http://tinyurl.com/q9tajzl 7 Patent trolls: Tracking down the litigious invention owners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23673383& FACT SHEET: White House Task Force on High-Tech Patent Issues http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2013/06/04/fact-sheet-white-house-task-force-high-tech-patent-issues 8 U.S. Senate gets bill clamping down on 'patent trolls' http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/18/us-patentscongress-idUSBRE9AH19920131118 9 Patent trolls? http://www.ted.com/conversations/18940/patent_trolls.html
  • 4. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 Europe Reactions on a pan-European patent system The creation of a pan-European patent system will help spread abusive patent litigation to Europe and could lead to E.U.-wide sales bans on products, leading tech vendors have claimed. Tech giants including Apple, Google, Samsung, Microsoft, Cisco, HP, Yahoo, Intel and BlackBerry sent an open letter to European officials outlining their concerns about the formation of a new unified patent court system in the E.U.10 The EU’s proposal would create a unified patent court, replacing the current patchwork quilt of countries all with differing levels of experience handling patent-infringement claims. Another problem is the new system would split the question of whether infringement occurred from consideration of if the patent is even valid. While the procedure is common in German courts, the division on questions opens up “significant opportunities for abuse.” Others like IPNav has written that the proposed change in how Europe handles patent challenges is “a great benefit to innovators” and the new setup “is going to cut the cost of litigation down significantly.”11 How it will work in Europe While the unified system has been heralded as simplifying the patchwork of rules that currently exist across the single European market, vendors say it also brings the threat of a one-stop-shop for quick region-wide sales bans. And allowing cases to be split up, with the validity of a patent decided in one court while infringement issues are decided in another, can expose product vendors to penalties even before the patent in question is declared sound, they claim. The unified patent agreement allows the validity and the infringement questions to be decided in different courts in the same case. Splitting those decisions into separate cases is known as bifurcation. If this system was to be introduced for most of the European market, it could lead to quick E.U.wide injunctions, barring products from the European market, before any determination of whether the patent in question is actually valid, the companies said. In the case of bifurcation, the companies' argument is not good, said Willem Hoyng [cq], a member of the Preparatory Committee, in an email. Bifurcation can only do harm if, as in Germany, the invalidity court is slower than the infringement court, Hoyng said. "It is clear from the Rules of proceedings that should not happen in the new system," he added. And even if there are weak patents, they do not survive in a court of law manned by good judges, Hoyng wrote.12 My comments It is probably true that weak patents would not survive in court. However, for many SMEs it is not the issue. It is the economic burden that might not be rewarded until a few years later that it is the concern for SMEs, innovators, but also for large companies, universities and research institutes. For some companies, it means they have to withhold investments in new R & D, expansion plans and new recruitments. 10 Patent trolls will gain from a single European system, vendors warn. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2049520/patent-trolls-will-gain-from-a-single-european-system-vendors-warn.html AND Daily report: Tech Industry Warns Europe of Concerns on Patent Trolls http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/daily-report-tech-industry-warns-europe-of-concerns-on-patenttrolls/?_r=0 11 Apple and fellow tech titans expand fight against patent trolls to EU. http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/09/27/apple-eu-patent-trolls/ 12 Patent trolls will gain from a single European system, vendors warn. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2049520/patent-trolls-will-gain-from-a-single-european-system-vendors-warn.html
  • 5. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 There are different paths to consider correcting the misuse of the patent system. Since many patents are international it is bound to be similarities in the application of laws and regulations between countries. Therefore, it is interesting to discuss measures taken by other countries. When it concerns US some measures has been presented above by the US President administration, other by representatives at the Senate and members of the House of Representatives. Also when it concern EU there are an on-going debate and development of new legislation that concern IP-rights that will be applicable in all EU states. The more harmonized and integrated EUs IP-regulations become, it is considered the more will patent trolls be active here. Several measures are discussed above. The most measures proposed above are legal. In US, the SHIELD act present how companies can be compensated financially if they win a case. This financial reward is a measure that comes afterwards. However, in one of my earlier papers entitled Dedicated tax to science I discuss how to get financial resources to IP-disputes for SMEs before for evaluation and for IP-disputes that end ups in court.13 As mentioned above, it is not that companies might be right in the future that is the major concern. It is the financial burden they carry meanwhile to dispute the claims for licence fees put on them that concern companies and especially SMEs. The extra financial burden inhibits the development of their companies. It is possible for countries in EU to give SMEs help by adopting a designated tax to science. This will increase the competitiveness of the EU-zone. When it concern the financial aspects of IP-disputes it would be most effective to adopt my suggestion that enable financial resources to SMEs to hire IP-lawyers and their investigators before trial in combination with the SHIELD act. The SHIELD act propose if the patent troll loses in court because the patent is found to be invalid or there is no infringement, then it pays the other side’s costs and legal fees, which in US often stretch into the millions of dollars. A thoughtful comment from a blog: “Make trademarks and intellectual property ownership a privilege instead of a right, meaning that if a company abuses the system for financial gain, then the patents or trademarks are revoked and the work is put in public domain.” Yours sincerely, Jan Softa - Somerco Research 13 EC member states competitiveness in R & D Part 1: Designated tax to science. http://tinyurl.com/n5qrhdl
  • 6. Jan Softa at Somerco 24/11/2013 Proposals Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 1 - Designated tax to science Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 2 – Strategy to support the software industry Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 3 – Actions to support women in ICT Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 4 – Going abroad – Competitive assets Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 5 – Business incubators, financial recycling and incentives into reward Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 6 – Standardization as a tool to increase competitiveness Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 7 – Different types of innovations Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 8 – Open source from science to society Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 9 – Crowd sourcing and crowd funding Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 10 – Green VAT for business Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 11 - Keep talents in Europe Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 12 - Research leftovers Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 13 - Science Parks (In progress) Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 14 – Patent trolls Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 15 – No title yet Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Overview – Old and new key areas in order to increase the competitiveness of the industry (In progress) Input on threats against information society http://www.slideshare.net/SomercoResearch