|
Authored by: PJ on Sunday, July 15 2012 @ 01:21 PM EDT |
I have a question. I'm only up to page 18, so perhaps
that isn't fair, but why would you call Intellectual
Ventures a non-litigating NPE, in that you link in
a footnote to the "When Patents Attack" article which
stated that IP uses set-up subs to sue all the time?
Also, why would it in any way benefit society if
productive companies send their patents to NPEs for
enforcement, since that tips the scale away from
cross-licensing deals that are much less disruptive
to the market?
And why would an individual like Lemuelson ever
be a benefit to society? And in what way is society
benefited by any NPE that files 293 different
patent litigations? Can you think of any productive
company that does this? So what is the societal
benefit in that picture?
And if the benefit of patents is that it attracts
investors, if the investors are attracted precisely
because they figure they can sue with the patents,
how is that helpful to society?
I'm no doubt missing quite a bit of your thinking.
But I'm watching the MOSAID hustle that Microsoft and
Nokia are using, and I can't see any benefit to any
society that wants good products on the market for
such players to try to force the market to use
*their* substandard products instead of Android,
using patents as the weapon of choice. Nor do I see
any benefit to society to reward such strategies.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|