Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   Time Magazine investigates patent trolling, interviews several industry leaders....and some drunk guy from Kentucky   (business.time.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, President Obama, Kentucky, Intellectual Ventures, Nathan Myhrvold, direct costs, patent claim, non-practicing entity, trolls  
•       •       •

4520 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jun 2013 at 7:17 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-06-08 03:31:02 PM  
FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.
 
2013-06-08 03:34:20 PM  
Suddenly it all makes sense.

"Intellectual Ventures, which has amassed a reported 70,000 patents since it was founded in 2000, is now targeting financial firms for infringement. "
 
2013-06-08 03:39:17 PM  
Several industry leaders, like Drew Curtis, a staff attorney at the EFF, and a law school professor? No offense to you, Drew, but that article had less "investigation" than the average Daily Mail gossip column.
 
2013-06-08 04:15:19 PM  

thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.


What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"
 
2013-06-08 04:17:34 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"


The go f*ck yourself is accurate, if I remember the TED talk correctly...not sure about the j*ck shiat. It was a shame This American Life did a patent troll episode a few weeks before FARK slayed the patent troll while Yahoo, Reddit, and others decided to settle.
 
2013-06-08 04:23:07 PM  

thismomentinblackhistory: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"

The go f*ck yourself is accurate, if I remember the TED talk correctly...not sure about the j*ck shiat. It was a shame This American Life did a patent troll episode a few weeks before FARK slayed the patent troll while Yahoo, Reddit, and others decided to settle.


IIRC, the "jack sh*t" part of the quote was stated by Drew in another broadcast. Can't remember if it was a podcast or not, but I recall him saying that too.
 
2013-06-08 04:29:53 PM  
Nice quote there Drew.
 
2013-06-08 04:31:47 PM  
"Some drunk guy in Kentucky" is like "some white guy in Utah."

A little more specific, please.
 
2013-06-08 04:44:21 PM  
Serious question/thought experiment... what if we abolished patents completely?  Invent away, market it, see if it sells.
 
2013-06-08 05:03:29 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: "Some drunk guy in Kentucky" is like "some white guy in Utah."

A little more specific, please.


Some drunk guy in Kentucky who hates Duke University.
 
2013-06-08 05:28:18 PM  

Techhell: ecmoRandomNumbers: "Some drunk guy in Kentucky" is like "some white guy in Utah."

A little more specific, please.

Some drunk guy in Kentucky who hates Duke University.


That's like some whit guy in Utah who's Mormon.
 
2013-06-08 05:47:43 PM  

farm6.staticflickr.com

 
2013-06-08 05:59:20 PM  
And that's why you don't fly a kite with a stranger in the Alps.
 
2013-06-08 05:59:24 PM  
The root cause it BS patents being granted in the first place. Many of these cases involve patents where a huge amount of prior art and existing technology already exists, or the specific use granted is a clearly obvious, non-inventive, use of existing technology. These patents should not have been granted and there should be a faster way to object to them and have them investigated and revoked. Troll can't sue if his patent has vanished.
 
2013-06-08 06:00:43 PM  

downstairs: Serious question/thought experiment... what if we abolished patents completely?  Invent away, market it, see if it sells.


Invent, market, competitor buys one, reverses engineers it, has a competing product on the market three weeks later... for 5% less than you, or more, because they're not paying for any R&D costs.

Or, invent, market and sell under strict NDA contracts and restrictive license agreements that stipulate that customers don't actually own the product, just rent it, and if they reveal any details, there are huge penalties.

Or, invent, and keep it secret if you can release product without revealing the invention. Simultaneously, everyone else in your industry wastes time and money doing the same invention and keeping it secret themselves. No one will publish any information, to try to stay slightly ahead of their competitors. Your industry wastes thousands of manhours and millions of dollars constantly reinventing the exact same thing.

Trolls are a bad thing, but there are ways to address them that don't send us back 500 years.
 
2013-06-08 06:04:31 PM  

Flint Ironstag: The root cause it BS patents being granted in the first place. Many of these cases involve patents where a huge amount of prior art and existing technology already exists, or the specific use granted is a clearly obvious, non-inventive, use of existing technology. These patents should not have been granted and there should be a faster way to object to them and have them investigated and revoked. Troll can't sue if his patent has vanished.


Like some sort of procedure where the patent can be "re-examined", perhaps with the additional "huge amount of prior art and existing technology" you claim exists? And the whole thing could be fast-tracked and cost less than litigation? And maybe you could do it anonymously, or, alternately, even participate and be able to respond to the patent owner when they argue their system is different? We could call them ex parte reexaminations and inter partes reexaminations, because you know how judges and lawyers love latin, those pretentious jerks.
 
2013-06-08 07:29:59 PM  

John Dewey: Techhell: ecmoRandomNumbers: "Some drunk guy in Kentucky" is like "some white guy in Utah."

A little more specific, please.

Some drunk guy in Kentucky who hates Duke University.

That's like some whit guy in Utah who's Mormon.


So...some drunk guy in Kentucky who hates Duke University and likes squirrels?

/Not raw, mind you, but if you take a nice propane grill and a bit of barbecue sauce -- delicious!
 
2013-06-08 07:44:15 PM  
fark yeah Drew.
 
2013-06-08 07:50:24 PM  
Drew should sue those pretender photoshop sites that stole the idea for competitions wth votes!
 
2013-06-08 07:52:07 PM  
Here's Drew's original TED talk...
http://youtu.be/E_lb3D7Ay-M
 
2013-06-08 07:54:07 PM  

basemetal: [farm6.staticflickr.com image 800x534]


You misspelled "Troll Enabling  Male Chicken Pirate."
 
2013-06-08 08:00:56 PM  
A sure sign of a patent troll? A law firm that is set up simply to send c&d letters hoping for settlements. I am amazed that deep pocketed companies choose to settle than fight.

Don't feed the trolls!
 
2013-06-08 08:28:00 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"


So he claims.  I contend that he settled and is paying off the trolls with sponsor money.
 
2013-06-08 08:39:26 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"

The go f*ck yourself is accurate, if I remember the TED talk correctly...not sure about the j*ck shiat. It was a shame This American Life did a patent troll episode a few weeks before FARK slayed the patent troll while Yahoo, Reddit, and others decided to settle.

IIRC, the "jack sh*t" part of the quote was stated by Drew in another broadcast. Can't remember if it was a podcast or not, but I recall him saying that too.


That's what he said that he said at least.
 
2013-06-08 08:39:42 PM  

thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.


Bears repeating.

/fly a kite yourself!
 
2013-06-08 08:46:06 PM  
img59.imageshack.us
 
2013-06-08 08:49:12 PM  

wallywam1: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"

The go f*ck yourself is accurate, if I remember the TED talk correctly...not sure about the j*ck shiat. It was a shame This American Life did a patent troll episode a few weeks before FARK slayed the patent troll while Yahoo, Reddit, and others decided to settle.

IIRC, the "jack sh*t" part of the quote was stated by Drew in another broadcast. Can't remember if it was a podcast or not, but I recall him saying that too.

That's what he said that he said at least.


Whoa. Is that hearsay, or is it...selfsay?
 
2013-06-08 08:50:14 PM  
The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.
 
2013-06-08 08:57:49 PM  

casual disregard: wallywam1: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: Bathia_Mapes: thismomentinblackhistory: FTA: "Curtis told TIME. "I told them: 'How about [nothing] and go [fly a kite].'" (Curtis actually used more colorful language).

Beautiful, Drew.

What he actually said, "How about jack sh*t and go f*ck yourself?"

The go f*ck yourself is accurate, if I remember the TED talk correctly...not sure about the j*ck shiat. It was a shame This American Life did a patent troll episode a few weeks before FARK slayed the patent troll while Yahoo, Reddit, and others decided to settle.

IIRC, the "jack sh*t" part of the quote was stated by Drew in another broadcast. Can't remember if it was a podcast or not, but I recall him saying that too.

That's what he said that he said at least.

Whoa. Is that hearsay, or is it...selfsay?


Self-reported. Beyond that I can't say.
 
2013-06-08 09:06:20 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.


So an inventor can't sell his patent? What if someone invents a new type of windshield wiper? Unless he owns a car company what else can he do but sell his patent or licence it?

The whole point of patents is to reward inventors for inventing things. If he can't sell his patent for lots of money then why would he bother developing it in the first place?
 
2013-06-08 09:41:52 PM  

Theaetetus: Flint Ironstag: The root cause it BS patents being granted in the first place. Many of these cases involve patents where a huge amount of prior art and existing technology already exists, or the specific use granted is a clearly obvious, non-inventive, use of existing technology. These patents should not have been granted and there should be a faster way to object to them and have them investigated and revoked. Troll can't sue if his patent has vanished.

Like some sort of procedure where the patent can be "re-examined", perhaps with the additional "huge amount of prior art and existing technology" you claim exists? And the whole thing could be fast-tracked and cost less than litigation? And maybe you could do it anonymously, or, alternately, even participate and be able to respond to the patent owner when they argue their system is different? We could call them ex parte reexaminations and inter partes reexaminations, because you know how judges and lawyers love latin, those pretentious jerks.


That whole latin thing is pretty goddamned pretentious. Thanks for noticing!
 
2013-06-08 09:49:01 PM  

Flint Ironstag: God-is-a-Taco: The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.

So an inventor can't sell his patent? What if someone invents a new type of windshield wiper? Unless he owns a car company what else can he do but sell his patent or licence it?


Maybe God-is-a-Taco believes that people shouldn't be allowed to invent things except as part of their employment, and that companies should automatically own every invention?
 
2013-06-09 12:21:18 AM  

God-is-a-Taco: The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.


What if the inventor doesn't have the means, knowledge or desire to market his product on his own, but still wants to get paid for it?  He should have that right to sell it to whomever he wants.
 
2013-06-09 04:05:45 AM  

Mentat: God-is-a-Taco: The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.

What if the inventor doesn't have the means, knowledge or desire to market his product on his own, but still wants to get paid for it?  He should have that right to sell it to whomever he wants.


Yeah nonetheless the guys that come up with an idea either don't patent them because it's a distraction from their work, do patent them but get no reward from it because their ideas are owned by their employer, or in the rare exception get quickly driven out of business by someone with lawyers.
 
2013-06-09 07:05:49 AM  

Cake Hunter: And that's why you don't fly a kite with a stranger in the Alps.


Or feed a stoner scrambled eggs.
 
2013-06-09 08:26:34 AM  

Astorix: A sure sign of a patent troll? A law firm that is set up simply to send c&d letters hoping for settlements. I am amazed that deep pocketed companies choose to settle than fight.

Don't feed the trolls!




According to Drew's TED talk, it takes $2 million and 18 months to fight a troll and that's if you're successful. It just makes good business sense to give them a fraction of that to settle instead of a long and expensive fight. The trolls know this. Not saying it's right.
 
2013-06-09 08:26:39 AM  

Cucullen: Mentat: God-is-a-Taco: The idea of buying patents is just ludicrous to me. I don't think they should ever belong to anyone but the inventor. Maybe his family after he dies... maybe.
People using patents like currency should have sent sent alarm bells decades ago.
I'd be very happy to see reform here, and since it affects the rich negatively it will actually happen.

What if the inventor doesn't have the means, knowledge or desire to market his product on his own, but still wants to get paid for it?  He should have that right to sell it to whomever he wants.

Yeah nonetheless the guys that come up with an idea either don't patent them because it's a distraction from their work, do patent them but get no reward from it because their ideas are owned by their employer, or in the rare exception get quickly driven out of business by someone with lawyers.


You should read the James Dyson book. He spent nearly ten years trying to sell his patent to vacuum cleaner manufacturers before eventually having to start his own company because no one would do a deal with him. Whatever you think of his cleaners (and I have one, and worked for a retailer for years, and think it's great) it's a fascinating account of how short sighted some companies can be. Both the "Not invented here" syndrome and the "We make a fortune selling bags! Why would we ever want a bagless cleaner?" attitude. A Hoover exec even admitted openly that with hindsight Hoover should have bought the patent and then done nothing with it to keep the idea getting to the market.
 
2013-06-09 09:27:44 AM  

dustman81: Astorix: A sure sign of a patent troll? A law firm that is set up simply to send c&d letters hoping for settlements. I am amazed that deep pocketed companies choose to settle than fight.

Don't feed the trolls!

According to Drew's TED talk, it takes $2 million and 18 months to fight a troll and that's if you're successful. It just makes good business sense to give them a fraction of that to settle instead of a long and expensive fight. The trolls know this. Not saying it's right.


Yep. That's the ugly truth. My company got sued by trolls and that was our legal team's estimate to litigate. We settled. I wanted to fight them, but I was outvoted. Probably the best thing from a business perspective, but my idealist side rankled in rage. I would have loved nothing more than to have seen their whole extortion ..er..business model vanish with the strike of a gavel.
 
2013-06-09 11:12:23 AM  
Sure, they will change the rules to help us. Sure.
 
2013-06-09 12:50:01 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: Sure, they will change the rules to help us. Sure.


They'll change the rules now that the trolls are targetting banks.
 
2013-06-10 12:42:01 AM  
"They said they'd sue me - it would have cost $100,000 in legal fees - but if I paid them less, they'd go away," Curtis said this week. "'Give us $100,000 or we'll destroy your business.' That's the patent-troll pitch. It's a complete shakedown."


i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report