Lawsuits, Red Hat, yummy....

[Jerry Feldman]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400
Bill McGonigle <bill at bfccomputing.com> wrote:

> Is there something inherently wrong with the business model of a  
> small inventor who licenses his inventions but outsources protection  
> prosecution?
>
> I recognize many patent trolls don't resemble this arrangement, but  
> it would be easy to squish the former in an attempt to squash the  
> latter.

This is a very difficult question. I think the problem is how do you
write a law that both enables the inventor to assign (or outsource
patents) but at the same time outlaws patent trolling.  Take a case
where a company invents and patents a widget. That company at some
future time, decides to sell the patent because they may no longer be
receiving revenue from that product. They sell it to a patent troll
whose business is to buy and enforce patents. The problem here is that
by legislating restrictions to outlaw patent trolling would also be
preventing a company from selling an asset. 

In the case of the 3 patents in the Red Hat/Novell case, we are talking
about Xerox, not a small inventor. But, you certainly have a very valid
case. 

Additionally please send email either to the listserv or to the poster
you are replying to, but not both. 


-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20071017/faa37d29/attachment.bin