Search
Patexia Community

Innovation, Technology, and IP News

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Case

CASE OF THE WEEK Treehouse Avatar LLC v. Valve Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1171 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 30, 2022) In the only precedential patent opinion issued by the Federal Circuit this week...

Female Entrepreneurs are Building Lifechanging Businesses. They Need Intellectual Property Protections to Do it.

As a woman who has spent her career as a serial entrepreneur and fighter for women entrepreneurs, I was appalled to read a recent letter from 100 members of Congress calling on Health...

Expert Testimony Inconsistent With Agreed-Upon Claim Construction Is Properly Stricken

Written by: Brianne M. Kingery & Jeremy Anapol TREEHOUSE AVATAR LLC v. VALVE CORPORATION Before Lourie, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western ...

Patent Experts Urge Kanter to Reject Calls to Scrap Avanci Business Review Letter

“The authors of the November 30 letter argue that the October 17 letter ‘perpetuates long-standing misunderstandings by some academics, policy activists, and companies, who ...

Patexia Insight 161: Top CAFC Law Firms of 2022

In late October, we released our second annual CAFC Intelligence Report. The report provided high-level statistics and insights and evaluated the stakeholders participating in the...

"They've Helped Themselves to My Artwork..." Banksy Accuses GUESS

  “Attention All Shoplifters…” Another guerrilla marketing strategy or unintentional (intentional) copyright infringement? This fall/winter 2022...

Feed tagged as "patent troll":
Earlier this year in February, Patexia released its second annual Patent Litigation Intelligence Report covering a 4-year period from July ... Read More »
Just the week before, Sonrai Memory filed several patent infringement lawsuits targeting a group of tech companies, including Google... Read More »
When Google purchased Motorola earlier this year, their intent to monopolize on Motorola's well-established patent portfolio was clear. As a result... Read More »
Whenever it comes time to scapegoat someone in the IP world, “patent troll” is the pejorative of choice. Even in polite company, “non-practicing... Read More »
Now that the maps debacle of the iPhone 5 has died down, you may feel the need to update your destination for GPS-based schadenfreude. Simply trace the route of Apple ... Read More »
The tech IP vultures that circled around Nortel's demise reaped a hefty reward of patents, but at the cost of sharing the $4.5 billion patent windfall. Apple took ... Read More »
Comments
James McArdleAmazon (kind of like Google) has some pretty cool advantages when it comes to the mobile market by already existing in a whole bunch of other industries (online goods and services). If they can acquire the IP necessary to play with the big boys in the mobile market, they could be well positioned to leverage those strengths and be a key player going forward.
Aug 13, 2012
Intellectual Ventures paints itself a champion of innovation and a liberator of inventors. More and more detractors consider the patent private equity firm steered by ... Read More »
As if Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook don’t have enough problems, Facebook’s being sued. The patent infringement suit filed by Software Rights... Read More »
Comments
Ray Van DykeYou gloss over patent law principles and assume much. Where a company takes another company's patented technology and is sued, then if that taking is shown, if that taking is egregious, and if the judge/jury thinks an example should be made, then the judge/jury MAY award enhanced damages. If the "taking" is accidental, then enhanced damages are normally not awarded.
Aug 13, 2012
Ray Van DykeSoftware patents are very important to many American companies. The reason we have controversy on software patents is these are fairly new. Plastics, sewing and other technologies that were cutting edge years ago have similar controversies. The patent system is rigorous and questionable patents can be invalidated either in court or at the Patent Office.
Aug 13, 2012
The '662 patent is owned by Parallel Iron, whose attorneys have recently filed suit against Internet giants such as Amazon, Facebook, and LinkedIn, and even some... Read More »
Comments
Wes Boudville[continued from previous posting] but no one did, then this can be used precisely as an argument for non-obviousness.
Feb 26, 2015
Wes BoudvilleBecause no one invented the invention prior to the actual filing date, and all the starting points of the patent were present. This is related to a recent quote by a Supreme Court jurist who said regarding non-obviousness that for any patent, anyone who objected to it could merely say, after disclosure, that the patent was obvious. It is never enough to say that it is obvious. One has to raise more precise points about the patent vis a vis the prior art. And one of the arguments for non-obviousness that can be made by the patent inventor is like judo - what I mentioned above.
Feb 26, 2015
Based on recent patent infringement filings in the District Court of Delaware, trucking yards must be the next cradle of innovation. Mobile Logistics LLC, a faceless... Read More »
Facebook recently fired a salvo in its defense against Yahoo by purchasing 750 patents from IBM. To backtrack a bit for those who have not been following the latest... Read More »
Comments
Anonymous Interesting viewpoint on patent aggregators. What if Yahoo is also using the same patent aggregator? For example, if Yahoo is a member of RPX, would that membership still be useful?
Mar 26, 2012
Engulfed in the bidding frenzy of its upcoming $5 billion IPO, the last thing Facebook needed to hear was what Yahoo had to say to them this past Monday: if... Read More »
Is Intellectual Ventures (IV) really the ‘King of Patent Trolls’? If so, the company has done its best to earn the title. Objectively speaking... Read More »
An enlightened decision by the National Institutes of Health has freed up crucial transgenic strains of mice whose use for research was being threatened by a patent... Read More »
The United States has always been a leader when it comes to innovation and invention.  However, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has become... Read More »
More than ever, patents are big business. And more than ever, there are business that are exclusively concerned with patents. The polite term is... Read More »
The latest patent troll case exploded into the U.S. District Court of Delaware earlier this month when Boadin Technology, L.L.C., filed an infringement suit against... Read More »
Comments
Bob ZeidmanGreat analogy. I did a different analogy on my blog enttitled "Grocery trolls and civil liberties" at http://www.safe-corp.biz/blog/2011/09/02/grocery-trolls-and-civil-liberties.
Sep 20, 2011
Anonymous Your real estate analogy is apt, but presumes too much. The more typical cases have slightly different scenarios. Suppose Judy's title is derived from an Illinois Torrens deed, itself depending on an original grant in 1810 proximate Kaskaskia, Illinois, that defines the property as "in the Illinois Territory" and the land extending along a line from "The Old Oak Tree" to "The Mississippi River" in 1810. Judy sends letters, not only to Qmart, but to every farmer and business on both sides of the river, within 20 miles, all the way to St. Louis, and offers to settle the trespass case for $100,000, expecting to discount settlements to $10,000. Most "troll" patents are more like this deed (Torrens certificates a fraught with clerical errors and forgery; the River moved in 1812) in that while they may be of either dubious validity, or dubious infringement, or both, the cost of proving innocence outweighs the price of settlement. Anheuser-Busch (remember, Judy claims all the way to St. Louis) might fight it, but the one-location truck stop in the contested territory can't afford it.
Sep 20, 2011
Consider a hypothetical situation where the MD of ‘Techomigo’, a budding small software-technology company, receives a notice of infringement one fine... Read More »
Comments
Pritesh KasliwalNot to Mention the famous RIM (Manufacturer of Blackberry) case, where the patent troll company won $612.5 M. Patent troll is an unethical business, indeed.
Jul 29, 2011
Nishant BoraIndeed, compulsory licenses can only provide effective solution to the multiplying trolls. Otherwise, the law is such that presently, functioning of trolls cannot be categorized as illegal under any statute.
Jul 27, 2011
Menu