The Defensive Patent License and Other Ways to Beat the Patent System(eff.org)
eff.org
The Defensive Patent License and Other Ways to Beat the Patent System
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/defensive-patent-license-and-other-ways-beat-patent-system
3 comments
Aha, thanks for the clarification. The article stated RPX "promises to never use [its patent portfolio] offensively against its customers". Never, ever, against anybody ... that's quite nice, actually :)
Private, for-profit companies also provide various ways to navigate the patent system. For example, RPX allows companies to buy into its large patent portfolio, which it promises to never use offensively against its customers.
So you give RPX protection money and they leave you alone. This is what Intellectual Ventures does. Why is it ok for RPX? (never heard of RPX before btw)
Or have I missed something obvious?
See also: Twitter Patent Agreement http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3853949
So you give RPX protection money and they leave you alone. This is what Intellectual Ventures does. Why is it ok for RPX? (never heard of RPX before btw)
Or have I missed something obvious?
See also: Twitter Patent Agreement http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3853949
RPX is defensive aggregation only - they don't go out and sue people.
There's also value add whenever you have centralized expertise: think PGExperts, Percona, and EnterpriseDB (mysql and postgres consultants) - if I'm running a company whose core business is not in the data, it's usually more economical to outsource that expertise than hire a 'superstar' DBA. Same with RPX: if your core business isn't IP law you might as well outsource that.
This is why consultancies of all shapes and types exist in the world, after all.
Companies spend millions just to defend a suit whether they win or lose - that's why they settle. The genius of RPX is that they basically identified that as an inefficiency aka market opportunity.
A lot of startups could learn from this model: taking an existing market and making it more efficient. That's usually a better bet than building an Instagram or Twitter analytics company - the big caveat of course is you actually have to have domain expertise in an industry to do this type of startup ;)
There's also value add whenever you have centralized expertise: think PGExperts, Percona, and EnterpriseDB (mysql and postgres consultants) - if I'm running a company whose core business is not in the data, it's usually more economical to outsource that expertise than hire a 'superstar' DBA. Same with RPX: if your core business isn't IP law you might as well outsource that.
This is why consultancies of all shapes and types exist in the world, after all.
Companies spend millions just to defend a suit whether they win or lose - that's why they settle. The genius of RPX is that they basically identified that as an inefficiency aka market opportunity.
A lot of startups could learn from this model: taking an existing market and making it more efficient. That's usually a better bet than building an Instagram or Twitter analytics company - the big caveat of course is you actually have to have domain expertise in an industry to do this type of startup ;)
Doesn't this defeat the purpose of a patent, though? If I file a defensive patent, and someone blatantly copies my patent and uses it in their own design, what legal recourse do I have? Wasn't protection against copying the original purpose of patents?
The idea of a "defensive" patent is that you only ever assert it against another company asserting its patents against you. If you file a patent with the intention of preventing people from using an idea, I suppose you could call that an "aggressive" patent.
> Wasn't protection against copying the original purpose of patents?
The original purpose was to provide an incentive for inventors to (a) invent stuff, and (b) disclose their inventions, so that after a limited time, the invention would be free (as in freedom) to use by any other party.
The problem now is that frivolous patents enable trolls to prevent, discourage, and stifle innovation, and the original purpose of the system is turned on its head.
When my cat plays with reflected lights dancing on the floor, she may well be in violation of somebody's patent.
When you see Google/Apple/Microsoft spending giga$ to acquire patent portfolios, it's not because they're short on brains: they need these patents to play the patent game. And that's so much money that's not being spent making better software for you and me.
> Wasn't protection against copying the original purpose of patents?
The original purpose was to provide an incentive for inventors to (a) invent stuff, and (b) disclose their inventions, so that after a limited time, the invention would be free (as in freedom) to use by any other party.
The problem now is that frivolous patents enable trolls to prevent, discourage, and stifle innovation, and the original purpose of the system is turned on its head.
When my cat plays with reflected lights dancing on the floor, she may well be in violation of somebody's patent.
When you see Google/Apple/Microsoft spending giga$ to acquire patent portfolios, it's not because they're short on brains: they need these patents to play the patent game. And that's so much money that's not being spent making better software for you and me.
>When my cat plays with reflected lights dancing on the floor, she may well be in violation of somebody's patent.
Maybe this one? http://www.google.com/patents/US5443036
Maybe this one? http://www.google.com/patents/US5443036
Agreed...why would someone bother filing a patent for an idea they fully intend on sharing freely?
I happen to work for RPX, and it's actually a very common misconception that people believe our model is identical to IV's.
The biggest difference is that RPX does not assert its patents, ever. It's our business model to protect operating companies making honest money from trolls. If you decide not to give RPX "protection money", we won't do anything to harm you. It's up to you to sign up for our services.
Another difference is that we also intervene in our clients' litigations, and help them resolve their lawsuits by buying patent licenses on their behalf. And we have advisory services for new companies not familiar with the rules of patent litigation, and patent market intelligence for those who want to keep up with what's happening.