I know they went after AOPA and Garmin - which didn't settle and mentioned being ready to fight - but I don't think they went to court... I'm not sure what the final resolution was - as it just kind of died away... New flight planning sites have popped up and I haven't heard mention of any further threats... FlightPrep is still out there and has a web presence...

With regards to AOPA, the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by a court in Oregon: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2014/july/24/judge-dismisses-patent-lawsuit-against-aopa

 

 

I think that simply "owning" a patent without benefiting from its use is the key. If I buy a patent because I want to sell or manufacture something that benefits from it then there is a case. But if I simply own a patent without benfiting from its use then that should be outlawed. This is the loophole in the law that should be closed.

 

It's not a loophole, it's deliberate. It's designed to promote small inventors who don't necessarily have the capability to put their inventions into production.

 

Let's say, for example, I'm an engineer who devises a fuel injector that can decrease fuel burn by 5%. That's a tremendously valuable invention, but there are perhaps only a dozen or two entities in the world that can make use of it who make gasoline engines. There's no reason whatsoever that such patents should be limited to big businesses. I should be able to own a patent even though I may not be using it directly.

 

Second, I should be able to withhold its use. It's a very valuable invention, and I insist on selling a license for at least $100m. If the large engine manufacturers refuse to license it, according to your reasoning they should be able to use it for free since I'm not using it directly. That again is a tremendous incentive for them NOT to license and just use it for free.

 

A patent is similar to renting a property. During that time, I have the right to use that property - or not. The fact that I am not living there does not give you the right to come in and use it for free. The problem is not patents, or software patents, or patent licensing. The problem is just a lot of poor quality patents - if you want to change things, look at the Alice decision.

 

 

 

There actually is a patent on how you hang your toilet roll. So any of you who don't hang your toilet roll with the loose end facing outwards can expect a letter of summons any day! This is no joke btw.

 

No, because it's not funny. The patent dates from 1891 and merely covers the holder, not how you use it.

 

Luke

Actually, the patent is not for the "holder" per se, but rather the way that each sheet is perforated on an angled bias to help prevent "over rolling" and allowing the sheet(s) to detach more smoothly. I note however that no manufacturer today uses his 'angled bias perforation' but has retained the "straight across perforation method. See the last diagram illustrating the angled bias perforation:

With regards to AOPA, the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by a court in Oregon: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2014/july/24/judge-dismisses-patent-lawsuit-against-aopa

Thanks Bill !

 

Regards,

Scott

He should set up a GO FUND ME site so people can donate to Austins defence and costs. I would gladly donate $50

Ok, how's about using a Kurt Godel's approach to solve this problem ?

 

Let's patent "Trolling for Patents".

 

Austin could try a patent on the act of suing  someone for using some idea, algorithm or artifact that has a pattent...

Ok, how's about using a Kurt Godel's approach to solve this problem ?

 

Let's patent "Trolling for Patents".

 

Austin could try a patent on the act of suing  someone for using some idea, algorithm or artifact that has a pattent...

 

Heck... Why not go all the way and patent patents

I would like to patent the idea of filing frivolous patents 😝..then i can sue these mindless trolls