He first defines patent troll. It is a term given to anyone who files a patent for something already being done, and then sues the people already doing it.
He explains that his company was sued for violating a patent for "news releases via email". He says that his company deals with news, and they were being sued for it. However, news releases at the time only referred to press releases and printed forms of media, which did not include email.
He says that the average troll defense can cost $2 million and take over 18months (if you win). This is why most companies settle during a patent lawsuit, even though most of the companies did not infringe on the patent. The point to settle is that it will be much less cheaper this way and less time consuming.
However, he was persistent about pressing on the lawsuit. He made the patent troll provide proof and replied no settlement to the patent troll's offer of a settlement.
One of the key takeways here is that infringement is much easier to prove than a patent. And that it is important to make it clear that either a) your company has no money at all or b) you would rather spend all that money with a lawyer and pressing on the lawsuit charges. He says that patent trolls' end goal is a settlement, because they make money by taking a percentage from the settlement. However, when a settlement cannot be reached, they are less incentivized to press on.
You're very concise! Maybe more content next time?
ReplyDelete