Remember the Samsung - Apple trial. Was it one trillion? 1000 billions? That's why nobody, apart Meyer, seems to care about patent laws dating from 17 or early 18th century. Because big firms want to keep that wrotten mess.

But not only software or US. I've heard that Pilatus had to circumwent 100s of hardware patents for the new PC-24. Keeping all top secret and secure all their little details by patents. And that's in Switzerland. I guess in the US most startups go out of businees because of historic patents.

Good on Austin, I'm glad he's bringing this up and showing just how crazy it is.

But he amount others are letting hatred cloud their minds. They are validating the legitimacy of claims which are absolutely nonsensical. You can't place a patent on aviation, two dimensional moving vehicles, radio or TV communications that use any type of electromagnetic waves or laser (optics), etc, etc.

 

If the patent that he is talking about was granted in 2010, that means someone was not paying attention to new applications in 2007, 2008 and 2009 (about three years prior), Apple, Samsung, etc, etc, should have had one lawyer who's only job in life is to look/watch at the patent office for any new application that can remotely be misconstructed into their controlled sphere and fields. Never read how a Patent comes to be and function? Well, well, well. "ignorance of the law is not an excuse."  Ops!

 

BTW, no it is not the purview of the Government who has to appoint the watch dog and pay for the vigilance of funny patents. So much to say but don't want to dwell on that now.

 

A quick fix, if the lawsuits are thrown out of court, the plaintiffs pay all costs to Federal and State governments and defend attorney fees. Make it a retroactive law as far back as the 1800's and of course let the law be "written so can be implemented immediately". 

     

As for Austin, I can't say cause I need to know his lawsuit in detail and what the other sides are stating as claims of infringement.

 

Hatred is a very, very bad advisor always and sure always be tempered down until reasons, logic and thinking can regain a footing again.

 

Cheers,

The patent and copyright system is broken.  Copyrights and patents have become toll booths on the road to commerce.  Clearly the system is being abused.  For example, it is really hard to see the justification for the length of copyrights being life plus 70 years.

 

Congress created this mess at the behest of high paid lobbyists who work for rentiers who make obscene profits by making questionable copyright and patent claims.

 

For example, it is really hard to see the justification for the length of copyrights being life plus 70 years.

 

Not for the owner and relatives if they are the true beneficiaries. 

 

Let's assume the max of 125 years protection. Who cares since I won't be here by then and there wasn't any business of mine in it to begging with. What I really do care is that after that max period it will automatically belong to HUMANITY as in We the people. Can you see now why that piece of paper where the "We the people" was written on it is so important and transcendental?  

 

Cheers,

 

BTW, no it is not the purview of the Government who has to appoint the watch dog and pay for the vigilance of funny patents. So much to say but don't want to dwell on that now.

 

     

As for Austin, I can't say cause I need to know his lawsuit in detail and what the other sides are stating as claims of infringement.

 

 

i think the argument is that it SHOULD be the purview of the government, since the creation process already is. they essentially are careless about issuing patents with the idea that if they let a bad one through it will come out in the courts. which would be fine, IF a competent patent defense was as cheap and easy to obtain as a fraudulent patent. it is not! for many of these trolling cases the defendant cannot afford a patent defense so they settle out of court. this is where the money incentive comes from. all they need to do is find companies that are the right size - big enough to have some cash to shake down for, but small enough that they can't afford to litigate for a few hundred thousand dollars.

 

austin's case is pretty much the usual thing. the patent is essentially for floating/remote licenses which have been around at least a few decades. there is certainly prior art at least since the early 90s (well before the 2001 date of the patent filing..) as near as i can tell some of the novelty has to do with 'storing the license on a smart card'.

 

thier approach is that anyone who hosts products on the google play store is infringing, but they go after the small businesses using the store, instead of google itself, likely because they know google has the resources to fight them... kudos to austin for fighting back..

 

cheers

-andy crosby

 

 

some of the novelty has to do with 'storing the license on a smart card'

Look up 'dongle' in software protection.  It's been around since the early '80's and plugged into an RS-232 serial port or a parallel port.  This is seriously old technology.

 

As one who's been in the 'industry' since it's beginnings... I can tell you that most of these patents I hear about... are fraudulent in claiming to be original.

Someone needs to sue the lawyers representing these patent trolls...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reexamination

 

Cheers,