5 ms·

It's interesting because this is the type of patent system abuse that we often rally so hard against. Now that the objective is somehow more 'noble' will we ign

by aolol 13y ago

It's interesting because this is the type of patent system abuse that we often rally so hard against. Now that the objective is somehow more 'noble' will we ignore that this approach is still fundamentally opposed to the prevailing opinion on the patent system and those who abuse it?

icebraining 13y ago
But let's be careful and not attribute opinions from different individuals as incoherence by the whole community. Not everyone here agrees with the prevailing opinion on the patent system.
betterunix 13y ago
I think this is more a case of "give them a taste of their own medicine," or at least that Kim Dotcom wants it to be viewed that way. [Edit: OR maybe not, should have read the entire article first...]
notatoad 13y ago
I think this is very, very clearly abuse of the patent system, and kim dotcom knows this. every time there's a highly-public and totally absurd abuse of the patent system it erodes the system a little bit more. I would never suspect apple or oracle of attempting to erode the patent system by bringing absurd lawsuits, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing that kim dotcom might do. I won't be so quick to judge him, given his stance on IP in general. of course, i could be wrong and maybe he's just a massive hypocrite.
- will_brown 13y ago
  >I would never suspect apple or oracle of attempting to erode the patent system by bringing absurd lawsuits, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing that kim dotcom might do. What about Apple patenting the rectangular electronic device(see here: http://www.google.com/patents/USD504889 http://www.google.com/patents/USD504889) and suing Samsung for $2.5 billion dollars with the majority of the claim for producing rectangular phones/tablets (see here: http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/08/03/apple-vs-samsung-who-owns-the-rectangle/ http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/08/03/apple-vs-samsung-who-...)
  - notatoad 13y ago
    yes, that's what i meant when i said absurd abuse of the patent system. but do you really think apple's goal is to bring about patent reform?
    - will_brown 13y ago
      It would be interesting to have real insight into what Apple thinks about the patent system. Obviously they are going to exploit the current system as best they can, as would any other company. However, the real question is financial for Apple, not ethical or moral, would they stand to make more money or less money based on a change? My guess is they want to eat their cake and have it too...meaning I am sure they want to be paid license fees on their IP and not have to pay anyone else, this would not be unique to Apple though. Is KIM different? I do not know, but he is being tried criminally for a service that I have always believed is not fundamentally different than Google Drive, DropBox, MS SkyDrive, or iCloud. So it is interesting these guys do not stand up, if not for him, then for themselves as it would stand to reason they may be targeted next, but do you think the feds would ever round up their top level executives military style the way they did KIM?
nicholassmith 13y ago
I wouldn't have called this as patent abuse, he came up with a neat idea, and applied for a patent. He didn't use it, but that doesn't invalidate that he came up with the idea, he just moved on. He hasn't sold it to anyone, he's never used it aggressively. He's being a dick now and saying "I might have to sue you!", but it's not patent abuse in the way Intellectual Ventures approaches it. Edit; Actually, I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion.
- icebraining 13y ago
  Patents aren't supposed to protect ideas.
  - genwin 13y ago
    It's a process, which is patentable.
    - drucken 13y ago
      In the US and virtually only the US.
      - genwin 13y ago
        No other country matters, according to the US. If a company in another country does business in the US it can be sued in Eastern Texas (patent trolls' heaven).
- genwin 13y ago
  > I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion. Precisely. Large companies routinely employ such negotiation, as does the US gov't to an extreme. Kim Dotcom is no worse.
  - mintplant 13y ago
    But then, he isn't any better for it, either. This is patent trolling, plain and simple - I don't see why people are rallying around him in this.
will_brown 13y ago
I am a proponent of changing IP laws, but this does not seem to run a muck of the type of abuse typical of most patent trolls. KIM obviously developed this system, because he is/was intimately involved in the industry and he likely invented the patent in question, and actually used or intended to use the same in commerce. Whereas your typical patent troll buys IP for the sole purpose of shaking people down, trolls usually did not invent or file the patent themselves, and they usually never have any intent to utilize the IP in the market. Additionally, patent trolls usually hold patents on patents that should not have been registered in the first place (they were obvious or the technology was already in the stream of commerce before the registration). Disclaimer: I emailed KIM with interest in researching the issue, performing due diligence, and maybe enforcement per the article. Though any response will be maintained confidential. I also have a track record of supporting KIM on the underlying legal problem, including a few posts/comments here on HN.
6d0debc071 13y ago
Uhm, I'm for changing patent law and I'm also for patents being abused as much as possible. The latter is linked to the former. People are never going to change patent law unless it hurts them. I don't want people not to do it - some people are always going to do it and the longer it goes on the greater the damage - I want it not to be doable, have a decisive engagement, so to speak, and have the problem put to bed for a while.

by aolol 13y ago

icebraining 13y ago

But let's be careful and not attribute opinions from different individuals as incoherence by the whole community. Not everyone here agrees with the prevailing opinion on the patent system.

betterunix 13y ago

I think this is more a case of "give them a taste of their own medicine," or at least that Kim Dotcom wants it to be viewed that way. [Edit: OR maybe not, should have read the entire article first...]

notatoad 13y ago

I think this is very, very clearly abuse of the patent system, and kim dotcom knows this. every time there's a highly-public and totally absurd abuse of the patent system it erodes the system a little bit more. I would never suspect apple or oracle of attempting to erode the patent system by bringing absurd lawsuits, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing that kim dotcom might do. I won't be so quick to judge him, given his stance on IP in general. of course, i could be wrong and maybe he's just a massive hypocrite.

will_brown 13y ago
>I would never suspect apple or oracle of attempting to erode the patent system by bringing absurd lawsuits, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing that kim dotcom might do. What about Apple patenting the rectangular electronic device(see here: http://www.google.com/patents/USD504889 http://www.google.com/patents/USD504889) and suing Samsung for $2.5 billion dollars with the majority of the claim for producing rectangular phones/tablets (see here: http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/08/03/apple-vs-samsung-who-owns-the-rectangle/ http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/08/03/apple-vs-samsung-who-...)
- notatoad 13y ago
  yes, that's what i meant when i said absurd abuse of the patent system. but do you really think apple's goal is to bring about patent reform?
  - will_brown 13y ago
    It would be interesting to have real insight into what Apple thinks about the patent system. Obviously they are going to exploit the current system as best they can, as would any other company. However, the real question is financial for Apple, not ethical or moral, would they stand to make more money or less money based on a change? My guess is they want to eat their cake and have it too...meaning I am sure they want to be paid license fees on their IP and not have to pay anyone else, this would not be unique to Apple though. Is KIM different? I do not know, but he is being tried criminally for a service that I have always believed is not fundamentally different than Google Drive, DropBox, MS SkyDrive, or iCloud. So it is interesting these guys do not stand up, if not for him, then for themselves as it would stand to reason they may be targeted next, but do you think the feds would ever round up their top level executives military style the way they did KIM?

nicholassmith 13y ago

I wouldn't have called this as patent abuse, he came up with a neat idea, and applied for a patent. He didn't use it, but that doesn't invalidate that he came up with the idea, he just moved on. He hasn't sold it to anyone, he's never used it aggressively. He's being a dick now and saying "I might have to sue you!", but it's not patent abuse in the way Intellectual Ventures approaches it. Edit; Actually, I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion.

icebraining 13y ago
Patents aren't supposed to protect ideas.
- genwin 13y ago
  It's a process, which is patentable.
  - drucken 13y ago
    In the US and virtually only the US.
    - genwin 13y ago
      No other country matters, according to the US. If a company in another country does business in the US it can be sued in Eastern Texas (patent trolls' heaven).
genwin 13y ago
> I don't think it's patent abuse as much as it is good old fashioned extortion. Precisely. Large companies routinely employ such negotiation, as does the US gov't to an extreme. Kim Dotcom is no worse.
- mintplant 13y ago
  But then, he isn't any better for it, either. This is patent trolling, plain and simple - I don't see why people are rallying around him in this.

will_brown 13y ago

I am a proponent of changing IP laws, but this does not seem to run a muck of the type of abuse typical of most patent trolls. KIM obviously developed this system, because he is/was intimately involved in the industry and he likely invented the patent in question, and actually used or intended to use the same in commerce. Whereas your typical patent troll buys IP for the sole purpose of shaking people down, trolls usually did not invent or file the patent themselves, and they usually never have any intent to utilize the IP in the market. Additionally, patent trolls usually hold patents on patents that should not have been registered in the first place (they were obvious or the technology was already in the stream of commerce before the registration). Disclaimer: I emailed KIM with interest in researching the issue, performing due diligence, and maybe enforcement per the article. Though any response will be maintained confidential. I also have a track record of supporting KIM on the underlying legal problem, including a few posts/comments here on HN.

6d0debc071 13y ago

Uhm, I'm for changing patent law and I'm also for patents being abused as much as possible. The latter is linked to the former. People are never going to change patent law unless it hurts them. I don't want people not to do it - some people are always going to do it and the longer it goes on the greater the damage - I want it not to be doable, have a decisive engagement, so to speak, and have the problem put to bed for a while.