I think it would be rare/unlikely now in the 18 month timeframe for that much $ (today’s dollars) based _only_ on sale of a _patent pending_ idea to a big co. Sadly I think now more likely big co would infrg and force the fight if patent ever issues. Would love to be wrong.
-
-
Replying to @jamesdavid
His success could’ve been a product of japanese market mania. And he certainly has the sale skills. it seems like big companies know much better today how to manage allegations of patent infringement through better lit. Management and blowing up patents
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @jamesdavid
“manage allegations of patent infringement” = lobbying & efficient infringement | invention didn’t change, the law was changed by the infringers
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @moskowitz @jamesdavid
How so? Did the aia make it easier to infringe?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @moskowitz
Yep (ThAnKs ObAmA/GoOgLe). The IPR process of the AIA was implemented in a way that basically meant any patent worth asserting could be ~95% chance be invalidated for roughly $300k In USPTO & legal fees. Mayo/Alice SCt decisions threw a cloud of uncertainty over most patents.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @jamesdavid @moskowitz
Courts decide not the uspto ultimately right? And they don’t just use prior art cited by the patent but any prior art I would think? Is this not news because patent attorneys don’t want it to be? Could this contribute to the slowdown in innovation in this country?pic.twitter.com/LafuER34Xf
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @moskowitz
Courts defer to the USPTO IPR process. Usually litigation is stayed pending the IPR proceeding. Tons of games with this. Not (main stream) news because patents boring. I think you’ll find this interesting:https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/07/16/real-staggering-cost-getting-patent-ptab/id=85639/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jamesdavid @moskowitz
What!? That’s the opposite of how it works with trademarks. With tms you stay the cancellation proceeding with the uspto in favor of the court. I would think that the courts would be better than the uspto for getting the right decision no?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @moskowitz
I agree. Broken and backwards. ArtIII court would be more efficient IMO. Each IPR proceeding is for 1 patent and limited as to what types of issues considered. Court can consider all patents and issues in one proceeding. Infgr get more chances to win with IPR system.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @jamesdavid @moskowitz
Very frustrating when the big business everyone assumes is responsible for "all innovation" (that's the reputation FAAG have) is actually behind the scenes busting the balls of smaller patent-holders.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.